$B    17    SSO 


THE    EDUCATIONAL    SIGNIFICANCE 

OF  THE   EARLY   FEDERAL 

LAND  ORDINANCES 


BY 


HOWARD  CROMWELL  TAYLOR 


SUBMITTED  IN  PARTIAL  FULFILLMENT  OF  THE  REQUIREMENTS 

FOR  THE  DEGREE  OF  DOCTOR  OF  PHILOSOPHY 

IN  THE  FACULTY  OF  PHILOSOPHY 

COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY 


PUBLISHED    BY 

^eatf)tv^  College,  (§olumljia  ?Hnibersiitj> 

NEW  YORK  CITY 
1922 


EXCHANGE 


-,^.^/.'--J'^^^:-?P|.^ 


THE    EDUCATIONAL    SIGNIFICANCE 

OF   THE   EARLY   FEDERAL 

LAND   ORDINANCES 


BY  ^ 

HOWARD  CROMWELL  pTAYLOR 


SUBMITTED  IN  PARTIAL  FULFILLMENT  OF  THE  REQUIREMENTS 

FOR  THE  DEGREE  OF  DOCTOR  OF  PHILOSOPHY 

IN  THE  FACULTY  OF  PHILOSOPHY 

COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY 


PUBLISHED  BY 

^eac{)ers(  College,  Columbia  Wini\itxsiitp 

NEW  YORK  CITY 
1922 


V 


<3 


z 


7 


Copyright,  1922 

By 

HOWARD  CROMWELL  TAYLOR 


U.^.^*'^^.' 


I 


s 


ACKNOWLEDGMENT 

Acknowledgment  is  due  to  so  many  that  it  is  impossible  to 
mention  them  all  by  name,  but  the  writer's  gratitude  is  none  the 
less  sincere.  He  is  especially  grateful,  however,  to  Professors 
J.  H.  Coursault,  W.  W.  Charters,  and  F.  F.  Stephens  for  their 
inspiration  and  guidance  while  he  was  a  student  in  the  Univer- 
sity of  Missouri,  and  also  to  Professors  Henry  Johnson  and  W.  A. 
Dunning,  of  Columbia  University.  A  special  debt,  which  is 
gratefully  acknowledged,  is  due  Professor  Paul  Monroe,  of 
Teachers  College,  for  his  sympathetic  and  helpful  counsel  and 
encouragement,  both  in  the  class  room  and  in  connection  with 
this  study. 

H.  C.  T. 


lU 

400301 


CONTENTS 

I.  The  Economic  and  Political  Importance  of  the 

Northwest i 

II.  Early  Attempts  to  Frame  an  Ordinance  for        7 
THE  Northwest 

III.  The  Ohio  Company 15 

IV.  The  Ordinance  of  1787  and  the  National  Land 

Policy 30 

V.  The  Educational  Significance  of  the  Ordinance 

OF  1787 38 

VI.  The  Land  Sales  of  1787  and  1788      ....       54 

VII.  The  Educational  Work  of  the  Early  Settlers      67 

VIII.  Management  of  School  Lands   and   Funds   in 

THE  Northwest 82 

IX.  Later  Applications  of  the  Principle  of  Land 

Grants  for  Education 103 

X.  Summary  and  Conclusions 114 

Bibliography 126 

Appendices  : 

A.  The  Ordinance  of  1785 129 

B.  Powers  to  the  Board  of  Treasury  to  Con- 

tract FOR  the  Sale  of  Western  Lands    .     .     133 

C.  Charter  of  American  University.  As  Drafted 

BY  Dr.  M.  Cutler 135 


IV 


CHAPTER   I 

THE  ECONOMIC  AND   POLITICAL  IMPORTANCE  OF 
THE  NORTHWEST 

The  purpose  of  this  study  is  to  discover  the  educational  signifi- 
cance of  the  early  federal  land  ordinances  and  to  show  how  these 
ordinances  affected  subsequent  legislation  with  reference  to  edu- 
cation and  the  development  of  the  public  school  system  in  this 
country.  The  problem  suggests  two  less  comprehensive  but 
more  definite  questions:  (i)  To  what  extent  were  these  early 
ordinances  the  work  of  land  speculators?  (2)  Did  the  advocates 
of  these  measures  have  any  broad  or  clearly  defined  educational 
policy  in  view? 

In  order  to  understand  the  early  land  ordinances  it  is  necessary 
to  review  briefly  some  of  the  historical  background  with  reference 
to  the  West  and  Northwest  of  the  colonial  period.  Possession 
of  these  lands,  in  so  far  as  France  and  England  were  concerned, 
was  determined  by  the  Seven  Years'  War.  From  that  time  on, 
the  settlement  and  government  of  this  territory  was  one  of  the 
important  public  questions.  Some  of  the  leading  men  of  the  time 
were  personally  interested  in  these  western  lands  and  projects  of 
settlement  in  the  frontier  country.  The  correspondence  of 
Washington  and  Crawford  throws  some  light  on  the  question.^ 

William  Crawford  lived  in  Pennsylvania,  near  the  Virginia  line 
beyond  the  mountains.  For  fourteen  years,  1 767-1 781,  he  and 
Washington  exchanged  letters,  largely  concerning  the  land  held 
by  Washington  in  the  West.  The  correspondence  shows  that 
Washington  had  employed  Crawford  to  seek  out  quietly  large 
bodies  of  good  land  along  the  Kanawha  and  Ohio  rivers.  In  all, 
Washington  accumulated  more  than  thirty-two  thousand  acres. 
In  September,  1767,  he  wrote  Crawford  that  he  would  join  him, 
as  promised,  in  trying  to  secure  land  beyond  the  Proclamation 
Line  of  1763,  because  he  felt  sure  that  that  measure  was  only  a 
blind  to  quiet  the  Indians  and  would  soon  be  repealed.^  This 
prolonged  correspondence  between  Washington  and  Crawford 

*  Washington- Crawford  Letters. 
UHd. 


•I  ?  ' /^  ?«t  ♦    .  »•  • 
2     Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

relates  almost  exclusively  to  the  details  of  locating  and  surveying 
the  best  lands  available  and  to  means  of  holding  these  lands 
against  squatters.  Washington's  holdings  in  the  western  coun- 
try were  valued  by  him  at  approximately  one  hundred  thousand 
dollars.  He  knew  the  West  well  and  had  great  faith  in  its 
future.  It  is  not  surprising  that  he  was  greatly  interested  in  the 
various  plans  of  settlement  and  government  of  this  region. 

In  1774  Washington  tried  to  form  a  company  to  develop  the 
connection  between  the  Potomac  and  Ohio  rivers.^  At  that 
time,  the  city  of  Baltimore  opposed  the  plan  because  it  was 
feared  that  it  would  divert  the  western  trade  from  Baltimore. 
Before  this  plan  took  any  definite  shape  the  war  began  and  the 
scheme  was  abandoned  for  about  ten  years.  With  the  surrender 
of  claims  to  the  western  lands  by  the  various  states,  especially 
the  Virginia  land  cession  of  March  i,  1784,  interest  in  opening  an 
easy  path  for  travel  from  tide-water  to  the  Ohio  country  was  re- 
vived. Two  of  the  terms  of  this  cession  are  of  special  importance."* 
One  is  the  provision  that  these  lands  should  be  laid  out  into  states, 
which  should  be  admitted  to  the  Union  on  equal  terms  with  the 
original  states.  The  other  is  the  provision  which  reserved  land 
for  the  soldiers  who  had  conquered  the  Northwest.  Undoubtedly, 
both  of  these  provisions  had  their  influence  in  the  subsequent 
legislation  with  reference  to  the  political  development  of  the  West 
and  in  the  solution  of  the  problem  of  paying  the  soldiers  of  the 
Revolution. 

The  fundamental  problem  at  this  time,  however,  was  an  eco- 
nomic one,  in  so  far  as  the  relation  of  the  western  country  to  the 
Union  was  concerned.  It  was  generally  felt  that  before  any  plan 
of  political  organization  of  the  West  could  be  put  into  operation 
it  was  necessary  to  bind  the  back-country  to  the  sea-board  by 
economic  ties.  Certainly  the  national  leaders  were  aware  of 
this  necessity.  In  the  same  month  that  Virginia  ceded  her  west- 
em  lands  to  the  Union  Jefferson  and  Washington  were  in  cor- 
respondence concerning  the  development  of  a  water  connection 
by  way  of  the  Potomac  and  Ohio  rivers.  Thus  was  Washing- 
ton's plan  of  1774  revived. 

In  a  letter,  dated  March  15,  1784,  Jefferson  urged  Washington 
to  undertake  this  work  of  development.     He  said:  ".     .     .     I 


^Sparks:  Writings  of  Washington,  IX,  p.  31. 
*  Journals  of  Congress,  IX,  pp.  67  flf. 


Economic  and  Political  Importance  of  the  Northwest  3 

am  confident  that  would  you  either  alone  or  jointly  with  any  per- 
sons you  think  proper  be  willing  to  direct  this  business,  it  would 
remove  the  only  objection  the  weight  of  which  I  apprehend."^ 
And  farther  on  in  the  same  letter,  he  said:  ".  .  .  When  you 
view  me  as  not  owning,  nor  ever  having  a  prospect  of  owning  one 
inch  of  land  on  any  water  either  of  the  Potowmac  [sic]  or  Ohio,  it 
will  tend  to  apologize  for  the  trouble  I  have  given  you  of  this  long 
letter,  by  showing  that  my  zeal  in  this  business  is  public  and 
pure."  ^  It  was  Jefferson's  opinion  that  Virginia  should  not  under- 
take to  hold  more  territory  than  she  could  govern  well,  and,  for 
this  reason,  he  believed  that  the  western  boundary  of  the  state 
should  not  extend  beyond  the  mouth  of  the  Kanawha.® 

It  appears  that  Washington  was  in  full  accord  with  Jefferson 
with  reference  to  what  should  be  the  policy  of  Virginia  as  regards 
the  development  of  the  western  territory.  In  reply  to  Jefferson's 
letter,  just  quoted  above,  Washington  wrote  on  March  29,  1784, 
in  part  as  follows:  "My  opinion  coincides  perfectly  with  yours 
respecting  the  practicability  of  an  easy  and  short  communication 
between  the  waters  of  the  Ohio  and  the  Potomac,  of  the  advan- 
tages of  that  communication  and  the  preferences  it  has  over  all 
others,  and  of  the  policy  there  would  be  in  this  state  and  Mary- 
land to  adopt  and  render  it  facile."^  While  Washington  also 
believed  that  it  would  be  wise  for  Virginia  to  relinquish  her 
claims  to  all  lands  beyond  the  meridian  of  the  mouth  of  the 
Kanawha  he  expressed  some  doubt  as  to  the  popularity  of  such  a 
policy  and  was  of  the  opinion  that  it  would  meet  with  some  op- 
position. In  this  connection  he  said:  ".  *  .  .  I  am  mistaken 
if  our  chief  magistrate  will  coincide  with  us  in  this  opinion."  ^ 

As  the  months  went  by  interest  in  the  western  question  devel- 
oped. Governor  Harrison  and  the  General  Assembly  were  real- 
izing that  some  definite  action  should  be  taken  at  once.  Harri- 
son and  Washington  had  some  discussion  of  the  problem.  On 
the  tenth  of  October,  1784,  Washington  wrote  Governor  Harrison 
of  Virginia  as  follows:  "I  need  not  remark  to  you,  Sir,  that  the 
flanks  and  rear  of  the  United  States  are  possessed  by  other 
powers,  and  formidable  ones,  too;  nor  how  necessary  it  is  to  apply 
the  cement  of  interest  to  bind  all  parts  of  the  Union  in  indissoluble 


^  Old  South  Leaflets,  VI,  No.  127,  p.  14. 

« Ibid.,  p.  15. 

'  Sparks:  Writings  of  Washington,  IX,  pp.  31  ff. 


4      Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

bonds,  especially  that  part  which  lies  immediately  west  of  us, 
with  the  middle  states."^  In  this  same  letter  Washington  ex- 
pressed the  opinion  that  "the  touch  of  a  feather"  would  turn  the 
people  in  the  West  in  any  direction.  He  favored  immediate  in- 
ternal improvements  to  bind  the  Ohio  Valley  to  the  United  States 
and  recommended  to  Governor  Harrison  the  appointment  of  a 
commission  to  survey  the  James  and  Potomac  rivers  from  tide- 
water to  their  sources.  He  showed  in  detail  the  great  advan- 
tages in  distance,  topography,  and  political  conditions  Virginia 
had  at  that  time,  pointing  out  especially  the  fact  that  the  British 
still  held  the  important  posts  at  Detroit,  Niagara,  and  Oswego, 
which  cut  off  New  York  from  connection  with  the  West.  Wash- 
ington further  suggested  in  his  letter  to  Governor  Harrison  that 
the  State  of  Virginia  encourage  private  corporations  to  develop 
the  navigation  of  the  James  and  Potomac  rivers. 

When  the  efforts  of  France  to  have  the  western  boundary  of  the 
United  States  fixed  at  the  Alleghany  Mountains  in  1783  and  the 
subsequent  plots  and  conspiracies  to  alienate  the  West  from  the 
Union,  fostered  by  France  and  Spain,  are  taken  into  account, 
Washington's  fear  that  the  West  might  be  lost  unless  strenuous 
and  immediate  steps  were  taken  to  hold  it  was,  beyond  ques- 
tion, well  founded.  The  strong  positions  on  the  north  held  by 
Great  Britain  made  it  easily  possible  for  British  influence  to  con- 
trol and  dominate  the  economic  development  of  the  Northwest 
unless  a  direct  and  accessible  connection  between  the  Ohio  coun- 
try and  the  Atlantic  sea-board  was  established. 

The  suggestion  of  Washington's  as  regards  the  encouragement 
of  private  corporations  to  develop  the  James  and  Potomac  rivers 
was  followed.  The  James  River  Company  was  incorporated  by 
an  act  of  the  Virginia  General  Assembly,  January  5,  1785, 
with  a  capital  stock  of  five  hundred  shares  at  $200  a  share. ^ 
On  the  day  before,  January  4,  1785,  the  Potomack  Company 
was  incorporated  with  a  capital  stock  of  five  hundred  shares  at 
$444  4/9  a  share.^"^  By  an  act  of  the  General  Assembly,  Washing- 
ton was  given  fifty  shares  of  stock  in  the  Potomack  Company 
and  one  hundred  shares  of  stock  in  the  James  River  Company.^^ 
In  a  letter  to  Washington,  informing  him  of  this  action.  Governor 

*  Sparks:  Writings  of  Washington,  IX,  pp.  58-68. 
»  Hening:  Statutes  at  Large,  XI,  p.  450. 
1°  Ihid.,  p.  510. 
"  lUd.,  p.  525. 


Economic  and  Political  Importance  of  the  Northwest  5 

Harrison  said:  "As  this  compliment  is  intended  by  your  country 
in  commemoration  of  your  assiduous  cares  to  promote  her  inter- 
est, I  hope  you  will  have  no  scruples  in  accepting  the  present, 
and  there-by  gratifying  their  most  earnest  wishes."  ^^ 

Washington  was  much  perplexed  by  this  gift.  In  his  letter  of 
reply  to  Governor  Harrison,  January  23,  1785,  he  said:  "No  cir- 
cumstance has  happened  to  me  since  I  left  the  walks  of  public 
life,  which  has  so  much  embarrassed  me."^'  He  asked  the  Gov- 
ernor to  advise  him  as  to  whether  he  should  accept  the  gift.  In 
the  letter  he  said:  "I  will  receive  the  full  and  frank  opinions  of 
my  friends  with  thankfulness."^^ 

Washington  became  actively  associated  with  these  projects 
of  internal  improvement  and  gave  much  of  his  thought  and  time 
to  them  and  though  a  large  share-holder  in  these  development 
companies,  due  to  the  action  of  the  General  Assembly,  Washing- 
ton's interest  was  not  selfish.  He  believed  this  work  of  opening 
up  the  West  to  be  of  utmost  importance.  His  attitude  in  the 
matter  is  clearly  revealed  in  his  correspondence.  He  wrote  to 
Edmund  Randolph,  July  30,  1785,  as  follows:  "Although  it 
is  not  my  intention  to  derive  any  pecuniary  advantage  from  the 
generous  gift  of  the  Assembly  of  this  State,  in  consequence  of  its 
gratuitous  gift  of  shares  in  the  navigation  of  each  of  the  rivers 
Potomac  and  James;  yet  as  I  consider  these  undertakings  of  vast 
political  and  commercial  importance  to  the  States  of  the  Atlantic, 
especially  to  those  nearest  the  center  of  the  Union,  and  adjoining 
the  western  territory,  I  can  let  no  act  of  mine  impede  the  progress 
of  the  work.  I  have  therefore  come  to  the  determination  to  hold 
the  shares,  which  the  treasurer  was  directed  to  subscribe  for  on 
my  account,  in  trust  for  the  use  and  benefit  of  the  public;  unless 
I  should  be  able  to  discover,  before  the  meeting  of  the  Assembly, 
that  it  would  be  agreeable  to  it  to  have  the  product  of  the  tolls 
arising  from  these  shares  applied  as  a  fund,  on  which  to  establish 
two  charity  schools,  one  on  each  river,  for  the  education  and  sup- 
port of  the  children  of  the  poor  in  this  country,  particularly  the 
children  of  those  men  of  this  description  who  have  fallen  in  the 
defence  of  the  rights  and  liberties  of  it."  ^^  The  closing  paragraph 
of  this  letter  throws  some  light  on  the  public  interest  in  this  mat- 

12  Sparks:  IX,  p.  83. 

"  lUd. 

"  lUd.,  p.  86. 

^  Ibid.,  pp.  116-17. 


6     Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

ter  of  opening  up  a  waterway  into  the  Ohio  country.  To  quote: 
"Perceiving  by  the  advertisements  of  Messrs.  Cabell,  Buchanan^ 
and  Southall,  that  half  the  sum  required  by  the  Act,  for  opening 
and  extending  the  navigation  of  the  James  River,  is  subscribed, 
and  the  twentieth  of  next  month  appointed  for  the  subscribers  to 
meet  at  Richmond,  I  take  the  liberty  of  giving  you  a  power  to  act 
for  me  on  this  occasion.  I  would  (having  the  accomplishment 
of  this  navigation  much  at  heart)  have  attended  in  person,  but 
the  president  and  directors  of  the  Potomac  Company,  by  their 
own  appointment,  are  to  commence  the  survey  of  this  river  in  the 
early  part  of  next  month;  for  which  purpose  I  leave  home  to- 
morrow."^® 

While  the  companies  were  being  organized  for  the  development 
of  the  navigation  of  the  Potomac  and  James  rivers  the  state  leg- 
islatures of  Virginia  and  Maryland  voted  appropriations  to  build 
jointly  a  road  from  the  highest  point  of  navigation  on  the  Potomac 
to  the  river  Cheat  or  Monongahela  and  these  two  states  jointly 
applied  to  the  legislature  of  Pennsylvania  for  permission  to  build 
a  road  from  Fort  Cumberland  to  Youghiogany.^^  The  Virginia 
General  Assembly  also  voted  to  open  up  the  overland  connection 
between  the  highest  point  of  navigation  ont  he  James  River  and 
the  headwaters  of  the  Kanawha  River.^'  Thus  it  appears  that  the 
feeling  of  the  economic  importance  of  the  West  was  becoming 
general  and  public  sentiment  was  finding  expression  in  legislative 
enactments  in  the  states  most  vitally  interested  in  the  West. 


1^  Sparks:  IX,  p.  117. 
1^  Ibid.,  p.  91. 


CHAPTER   II 

EARLY  ATTEMPTS  TO  FRAME  AN  ORDINANCE 
FOR  THE  NORTHWEST 

Not  only  were  the  states  of  Virginia  and  Maryland  actively 
interested  in  the  economic  development  of  the  West,  but  Congress 
more  or  less  keenly  felt  the  economic  and  political  importance  of 
the  Ohio  Valley.  With  all  of  its  inefficiency  and  impotence  and 
lack  of  strong,  constructive  leadership.  Congress  did  some  very 
necessary  and  effective  work  in  laying  the  foundation  for  the 
Northwest  Ordinance  of  1787,  the  greatest  monument  to  the  Con- 
gress for  its  service  to  the  nation. 

A  commission  was  appointed  by  Congress  to  extinguish  Indian 
claims  to  the  national  lands  by  treaties  with  the  Indians.  The 
Treaty  of  Fort  Stanwix  practically  eliminated  the  Six  Nations  as 
contenders  for  possession  of  the  Northwest.  This  treaty  was  of 
especial  importance  because  of  the  great  strength  of  the  Six 
Nations  and  also  because  of  their  strategic  position  at  the  very 
gateway  to  the  great  Northwest.  Washington  wrote  to  Richard 
Henry  Lee,  then  president  of  Congress,  and  expressed  great  satis- 
faction at  the  liberal  cession  of  lands  that  had  been  gained  by  the 
treaty.  He  gave  voice  to  the  hope  that  the  Western  Indians  would 
follow  the  example  of  the  Six  Nations  and  make  as  favorable  terms 
with  the  commission  then  on  their  way  to  Fort  Pitt  to  treat  with 
them.  In  this  same  letter, ^  December  14,  1784,  Washington 
called  Lee's  attention  to  the  movement  under  way  in  Virginia 
and  Maryland  for  the  development  of  the  James  and  Potomac 
rivers  as  highways  to  the  West,  and  in  this  connection  he  said : 
"Would  it  not,  at  the  same  time,  be  worthy  of  the  wisdom  and 
attention  of  Congress  to  have  the  western  waters  well  explored, 
the  navigation  of  them  fully  ascertained  and  accurately  laid  down 
and  a  complete  and  perfect  map  made  of  the  country ;  at  least  as 
far  westerly  as  the  Miamies?  .  .  .  Would  there  be  any  im- 
propriety, do  you  think,  Sir,  in  reserving  for  special  sale  all  mines, 
minerals,  and  salt  springs,  in  the  general  grants  of  land  from  the 
United  States?    The  public,  instead  of  the  few  knowing  ones, 

*  Sparks:  IX,  pp.  79-81. 


8      Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

might  in  that  case  receive  the  benefits  which  would  proceed  from 
the  sale  of  them."  Few  men  saw  as  clearly  as  Washington  the 
great  importance  of  working  out  a  definite  policy  of  organization 
and  disposal  of  the  western  lands  by  Congress.  Concerning  this 
he  wrote  to  Lee  as  follows:  "To  hit  upon  a  happy  medium  price 
for  western  lands,  for  the  prevention  of  monopoly  on  one  hand  and 
not  discouraging  useful  settlers  on  the  other,  will  no  doubt  re- 
quire consideration;  but  ought  not,  in  my  opinion,  to  employ 
too  much  time  before  the  terms  are  announced.  The  spirit  of 
emigration  is  great." 

After  the  Treaty  of  1783,  the  pressure  of  the  westward  move- 
ment had  greatly  increased.  Not  only  Washington,  but  mem- 
bers of  Congress  and  especially  the  people  in  the  West  felt  the  need 
of  some  political  organization  of  the  territory  beyond  the  moun- 
tains. Sentiment  in  favor  of  nationalizing  all  western  land  was 
becoming  general.  In  1781,  Virginia,  following  the  suggestion  of 
the  New  York  Legislature ,2  opened  the  way  for  the  solution  of  the 
vexing  problem  of  conflicting  state  claims  to  western  lands  by  the 
cession  of  her  lands  in  the  Northwest  to  the  national  government. 
Later  the  terms  of  this  act  of  cession  were  so  modified  as  to  retain 
the  Virginia  Military  Reserve,  over  which  the  State  of  Virginia 
was  to  exercise  no  political  control.  (The  deed  as  finally  executed 
is  in  the  Journals  of  Congress  for  March  i,  1784-^) 

The  terms  on  which  this  cession  was  made  are  of  great  im- 
portance because  they  very  definitely  influenced  the  policy  of  the 
national  government  in  dealing  with  the  lands  acquired  in  the 
Northwest,  and  by  thus  setting  a  precedent,  materially  affected 
the  general  policy  of  the  government  in  the  organization  of  the 
public  domain  into  territories  and  states.  In  brief  outline  the 
important  terms  of  the  cession  are  as  follows:  (i)  The  land  was 
to  be  laid  out  in  states,  with  the  size  roughly  designated.  This 
provision  was  subsequently  modified  at  the  request  of  Congress. 
(2)  The  states  formed  were  to  have  a  republican  form  of  govern- 
ment and  were  to  be  admitted  to  the  Union.  (3)  The  United 
States  was  to  reimburse  Virginia  for  the  conquest  of  the  North- 
west. (4)  The  French-Canadian  citizens  within  the  bounds  of 
the  cession  were  to  be  secure  in  their  rights.  (5)  Not  more  than 
one  hundred  fifty  thousand  acres  were  reserved  for  George  R. 


2  New  York  offered  to  cede  her  western  lands  in  1780. 
'  Journals  of  the  Continental  Congress,  IV,  pp.  67  ff. 


Early  Attempts  to  Frame  an  Ordinance  for  the  Northwest       9 

Clark  and  his  officers  and  soldiers.  The  shape  of  this  reserve  was 
definitely  stated.  (6)  The  United  States  was  to  grant  other  mili- 
tary lands  if  those  south  of  the  Ohio  River  proved  insufficient  to 
meet  the  legal  claims  of  the  soldiers  of  the  Revolution  against  the 
State  of  Virginia.  The  location  of  such  lands  was  roughly  speci- 
fied. (7)  All  other  land  was  to  be  for  a  common  fund  for  all  the 
states. 

Massachusetts  and  other  states  followed  the  example  of  Vir- 
ginia and  surrendered  their  claims  to  the  Northwest.  With  the 
extinguishment  of  the  state  claims  to  the  Northwest,  the  necessity 
of  Congressional  action  in  dealing  with  this  territory  became  all 
the  more  urgent.  In  the  same  month  that  the  Virginia  cession 
finally  became  eff^ective  a  committee  in  Congress,  composed  of 
Jefferson,  Chase  of  Maryland,  and  Howell  of  Rhode  Island,  re- 
ported the  Ordinance  of  1 784  for  the  organization  and  government 
of  the  newly  acquired  territory.  It  was  so  drawn  as  to  make  ef- 
fective the  conditions  stipulated  in  the  Virginia  cession.  This 
ordinance  did  not  mention  education.  The  original  draft  con- 
tained a  clause  prohibiting  slavery  after  1800,  but  this  was  stricken 
out  by  amendment  to  the  ordinance,  as  revised  by  the  committee, 
and  reported  in  April,  1784.^  The  chief  importance  of  this  Ordi- 
nance of  1784  is  in  the  fact  that  it  nationalized  the  Northwest. 
While  it  was  legally  in  effect  until  1787,  it  was  practically  a  dead 
letter  because  no  adequate  provision  was  made  for  the  sale  of  land 
to  actual  settlers. 

It  evidently  was  thought  by  the  committee  which  framed  the 
Ordinance  of  1784,  that  Congress  would  make  the  necessary  pro- 
visions for  the  disposal  of  the  lands.  Jefferson  wrote  Madison, 
April  25,  1784:  "The  minuter  circumstances  of  selling  the  un- 
granted  lands  will  be  provided  in  an  ordinance  already  prepared 
but  not  reported."^  Such  an  ordinance  was  eventually  reported 
by  a  committee  of  which  Jefferson  was  chairman,  but  failed  of 
passage,  six  states  voting  against  it.®  The  following  year,  May 
20,  1785,  there  was  enacted  the  well-known  land  ordinance  which 
provided  for  the  survey  and  sale  of  the  western  lands.  It  con- 
tained this  provision:  "There  shall  be  reserved  the  Lot  No.  16, 
of  every  township,  for  the  maintenance  of  public  schools,  within 

<  Old  South  Leaflets,  VI,  No.  127. 

5  Univ.  of  Nebraska  Sem.  Papers:  Jay  A.  Barrett:  Evolution  of  the  Ordinance 
of  1787,  p.  27;  Bancroft:  Hist,  of  Formation  of  Constitution,  I,  p.  356. 
*  Randall:  Life  of  Jefferson,  I,  p.  400. 


I  o    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

the  said  township."  ^  The  original  draft  of  the  ordinance  as  pre- 
sented on  April  26,  1785,  provided  for  townships  seven  miles 
square.  It  was  so  amended,  May  20,  1785,  as  to  provide  for  town- 
ships six  miles  square,  thus  instituting  the  plan  of  congressional 
survey  that  has  been  followed  to  the  present  time.^  Congress 
made  provision  that  these  lands  thus  surveyed  should  be  sold  in 
square  mile  tracts  and  by  townships.^ 

Washington  had  no  high  opinion  of  this  plan  of  sale.  He  wrote 
to  William  Grayson,  in  Congress,  August  22,  1785,  criticising  the 
disposition  of  Congress  not  to  exercise  the  little  authority  they 
possessed.  He  said  in  part:  ''Instance  your  late  ordinance  re- 
specting the  disposal  of  the  western  lands,  in  which  no  state  with 
the  smallest  propriety  could  have  obtruded  an  interference.  No 
doubt  but  the  information  of  Congress  from  the  back  country  is 
better  than  mine,  respecting  the  operations  of  this  ordinance;  but 
I  have  understood  from  some  sensible  people,  that,  besides  running 
they  know  not  where  to  purchase,  the  lands  are  of  so  versatile  a 
nature  that,  to  the  end  of  time,  they  will  not,  by  those  who  are 
acquainted  therewith,  be  purchased  either  in  townships  or  by 
square  miles."  ^°  Washington  referred  here  to  the  curious  com- 
promise in  the  ordinance,  due  to  the  conflict  between  the  New 
England  township  idea  and  the  southern  preference  for  a  smaller 
unit.  The  ordinance  provided  that  alternate  townships  should 
be  sub-divided  into  "lots"  or  sections  of  six  hundred  forty  acres — 
a  square  mile — and  sold  by  sections.  Thus  one  half  of  the  town- 
ships were  to  be  sold  entire  and  the  other  half  were  to  be  sold  in 
tracts  of  square  miles. 

Washington  had  stated  to  Hugh  Williamson,  in  Congress,  a  few 
months  earlier,  his  ideas  concerning  a  plan  for  the  disposal  of 
western  lands.  The  occasion  for  this  expression  on  the  part  of 
Washington  was  the  Treaty  of  Fort  Stanwix  which  quieted  the 
claims  of  the  Six  Nations  to  the  Northwest.  He  wrote  William- 
son, March  15,  1785,  as  follows:  "I  thank  you.  Sir,  for  your  ac- 
count of  the  last  Indian  treaty.  I  had  received  a  similar  one 
before,  but  do  not  comprehend  by  which  line  our  northern  limits 
are  to  be  fixed.     Two  things  seem  naturally  to  result  from  this 

'  Journals  of  American  Congress,  IV,  pp.  520-22.    See  Appendix  A. 
^History  of  North  America,  IX:  Geer:  Louisiana  Purchase  and  Westward 
Movement,  pp.  58-75. 

•  Journals  of  American  Congress,  IV,  pp.  520-22.     See  Appendix  A. 
"Sparks:  IX,  p.  126. 


Early  Attempts  to  Frame  an  Ordinance  for  the  Northwest     ii 

agreement  with  the  Indians;  the  terms  on  which  the  ceded  lands 
are  to  be  disposed  of,  and  the  mode  of  setthng  them.  The  first, 
in  my  opinion,  ought  not  to  be  delayed:  and  the  second  ought  not 
to  be  too  diffusive.  Compact  and  progressive  seating  will  give 
strength  to  the  Union,  admit  law,  and  good  government,  and  fed- 
eral aids  at  an  early  period.  Sparse  settlements  in  several  new 
states,  or  a  large  territory  of  one,  will  have  the  directly  contrary 
effects;  and  while  it  opens  a  large  field  to  land-jobbers  and  specu- 
lators, who  are  prowling  about  like  wolves  in  many  shapes,  will 
injure  the  real  occupiers  and  useful  citizens  and  consequently  the 
public  interest. 

"  If  a  tract  of  country,  of  convenient  size  for  a  new  state,  con- 
tiguous to  the  present  settlements  on  the  Ohio,  is  laid  off,  and  a 
certain  proportion  of  the  land  seated,  or  at  least  granted  before 
any  other  state  is  marked  out,  and  no  land  is  to  be  obtained  beyond 
the  limits  of  it,  we  shall  I  conceive,  reap  great  political  advantages 
from  such  a  line  of  conduct,  and  without  it  we  may  be  involved  in 
much  trouble  and  perplexity  before  any  new  state  will  be  well 
organized  or  contribute  anything  to  the  support  of  the  Union."  ^^ 
While  there  is  nothing  original  in  these  ideas  of  Washington's,  they 
embody  one  of  the  sanest  points  of  view  developed  as  regards  the 
sale  of  western  lands.  The  Ordinance  of  1785  was  a  compromise 
measure,  and  like  nearly  all  compromises,  was  by  no  means  perfect. 

New  England  influence  had  great  weight  with  the  committee 
that  framed  the  ordinance  and  with  Congress  in  its  passage. 
Tradition  and  precedent  added  weight  to  the  influence  of  New 
England.  The  colonial  township  surveys  and  the  custom  of 
"township  planting"  of  New  England  had  proved  more  success- 
ful than  the  southern  plan  of  "indiscriminate  locations,"  with 
the  inevitable  over-lapping  of  surveys.  When  Grayson's  com- 
mittee first  reported  the  ordinance,  Rufus  King,  a  leading  member 
of  the  committee,  sent  a  draft  of  it  to  Colonel  Timothy  Pickering 
and  wrote  him:  "You  will  find  thereby,  that  your  ideas  have  had 
great  weight  with  the  Committee  who  reported  the  ordinance."  ^^ 
On  May  8,  King  again  wrote  to  Pickering  that  they  had  been 
forced  to  "give  up  the  plan  of  townships  so  as  to  admit  the  sale 
of  one  half  of  the  townships  In  lots  of  a  square  mile."  ^^    After  the 


"  Sparks:  IX,  pp.  105-06. 

12  Octavius  Pickering:  The  Life  of  Timothy  Pickering,  I,  p.  511. 

"/6i<i.,p.  514. 


1 2    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

final  passage  of  the  ordinance,  King  wrote  to  Pickering:  "All 
parties  who  have  advocated  particular  modes  of  disposing  of  this 
western  territory  have  relinquished  some  things  they  wished,  and 
the  ordinance  is  a  compromise  of  opinions."  ^'^ 

The  conflicting  ideas  in  the  committee  concerning  the  ordinance 
were  clearly  set  forth  by  Grayson,  the  chairman  of  the  committee. 
He  wrote  Washington  as  follows:  "Some  gentlemen  looked  upon 
it  as  a  matter  of  revenue  only,  and  that  it  was  true  policy  to  get 
the  money  without  parting  with  inhabitants  to  populate  the 
country,  and  thereby  preventing  the  land  in  original  states  from 
depreciating.  Others  (I  think)  were  afraid  of  interference  with 
the  lands  now  at  market  in  the  individual  states.  Part  of  the 
Eastern  gentlemen  wish  to  have  the  land  sold  in  such  a  manner  as 
to  suit  their  own  people,  of  whom  I  believe  there  will  be  great 
numbers,  particularly  from  Connecticut.  But  others  are  ap- 
prehensive of  the  consequences  which  may  result  from  the  new 
states  taking  their  position  in  the  confederacy.  They,  perhaps, 
wish  that  this  event  may  be  delayed  as  long  as  possible."  ^^ 

The  advocates  of  the  Ordinance  of  1785  presented  strong 
arguments  in  its  support.  It  was  pointed  out  that  congressional 
surveys  would  disclose  a  great  deal  of  valuable  information  con- 
cerning the  western  lands;  and  would  preclude  "controversy  on 
account  of  bounds  to  the  latest  ages. "  It  was  also  urged  that  sur- 
veys into  squares  were  the  least  expensive  because,  in  many  cases, 
only  two  sides  of  the  square  would  be  run.  Sale  by  auction  was 
defended  on  the  ground  that  it  gave  equal  opportunity  to  those 
not  on  the  land.  The  sale  by  townships  was  advocated  because 
it  would  make  an  appeal  to  the  prospective  settlers  from  the  New 
England  States.  Especial  emphasis  was  laid  upon  the  provision 
which  dedicated  section  sixteen  in  each  township  to  public  educa- 
tion. The  chief  advantage  of  this  provision,  according  to  its 
advocates,  was  that  it  would  promote  compact  settlement. ^^  As 
regards  this  point,  Grayson  said:  ".  .  .  The  idea  of  a 
township,  with  the  temptation  of  a  support  for  religion  and  educa- 
tion, holds  forth  an  inducement  for  the  purpose  of  purchasing  and 
settling  together ;  that  the  southern  mode  would  defeat  this  end  by 
intruding  the  idea  of  indiscriminate  locations  and  settlements, 


"Octavius  Pickering:  The  Life  of  Timothy  Pickering,  I,  p.  516. 
15  Bancroft:  I,  p.  425;  Treat:  The  National  Land  System,  pp.  32-33. 
"  Treat:  p.  31. 


Early  Attempts  to  Frame  an  Ordinance  for  the  Northwest     13 

which  would  have  a  tendency  to  destroy  all  these  Inducements  to 
emigration  which  are  derived  from  friendships,  religion  and 
relative  connections."^^  There  seems  to  have  been  no  clear  con- 
sciousness on  the  part  of  the  committee  or  of  Congress  of  the  full 
significance  of  this  educational  provision.  Apparently,  it  was 
viewed  only  as  a  selling  point  for  the  disposal  of  the  western  lands 
in  compact  settlements.  The  thought  of  laying  a  permanent 
foundation  for  a  public  school  system  seems  not  to  have  entered 
into  the  discussion  of  the  matter. 

One  point  urged  in  favor  of  the  Ordinance  of  1785  was  the  ease 
and  simplicity  with  which  title  to  land  could  be  obtained.  As  one 
of  the  advocates  of  the  measure  at  the  time  expressed  it:  "The 
present  plan  excludes  all  the  formalities  of  warrants,  entries,  loca- 
tions, returns,  and  caveats,  as  the  first  and  last  process  is  a 
deed."^^  The  importance  of  this  feature  of  the  ordinance  can 
scarcely  be  over-emphasized.  It  was  a  marked  improvement  on 
the  clumsy  and  inaccurate  methods  then  prevalent  in  Virginia  and 
throughout  the  South.  It  set  a  precedent  that  has  been  generally 
followed  and  which  has  done  much  to  encourage  the  sale  of  public 
lands. 

Grayson  pointed  out  another  argument  in  favor  of  the  ordi- 
nance, which  probably  had  great  weight  in  bringing  about  its 
final  passage.  It  was  the  fact  "that  if  the  plan  should  be  found 
by  experience  to  be  wrong,  it  could  easily  be  altered  by  reducing 
the  quantities  and  multiplying  the  surveys."^® 

The  problem  of  fixing  the  price  of  the  western  lands  was  one  of 
the  most  difficult.  On  the  one  hand  the  price  had  to  be  low 
enough  to  be  within  the  reach  of  the  poorer  classes,  who  were  the 
most  likely  to  move  into  the  West,  and  at  the  same  time  be  high 
enough  to  discourage  speculators  and  land  jobbers  from  buying 
and  holding  the  best  lands.  The  difficulty  was  met  in  the  Ordi- 
nance of  1785  by  the  requirement  that  the  lands  be  sold  at  public 
auction,  "provided,  that  none  of  the  lands,  within  the  said  terri- 
tory, be  sold  under  the  price  of  one  dollar  the  acre,  to  be  paid  in 
specie,  or  loan  office  certificates,  reduced  to  specie  value,  by  the 
scale  of  depreciation,  or  certificates  of  liquidated  debts  of  the 
United  States,   including  interest,   besides  the  expense  of  the 


1'  Bancroft:  I,  p.  425;  Treat:  p.  31. 
1*  Treat:  p.  32. 
19  Ihid. 


14    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

survey  and  other  charges  thereon,  which  are  hereby  rated  at 
thirty-six  dollars  the  township,  in  specie,  or  certificates  as  afore- 
said, and  so  in  the  same  proportion  for  a  fractional  part  of  a  town- 
ship, or  of  a  lot,  to  be  paid  at  the  time  of  the  sales;  on  failure  of 
which  payment,  the  said  lands  shall  again  be  offered  for  sale."^^ 
It  was  believed  that  the  poorer  classes,  especially  in  New  England, 
would  unite  to  purchase  a  township.  It  was  also  thought  that 
the  high  initial  cost  would  prevent  speculation,  but,  if  in  spite  of 
this  high  cost,  a  speculator  should  buy  lands,  it  would  increase  the 
revenue  of  the  land  office  which  was  by  no  means  undesirable. 
As  a  matter  of  fact,  the  high  price  not  only  effectively  discouraged 
speculators,  but  also  kept  legitimate  settlers  from  taking  up  the 
lands.  This  proved  to  be  the  weakest  point  in  the  Ordinance  of 
1785,  and  because  of  this  weakness,  the  ordinance  was  of  little  or 
no  immediate  usefulness  in  the  development  of  the  West. 

The  general  policy  for  the  survey  and  sale  of  the  public  domain 
was  sound,  and  due  credit  should  be  given  to  the  framers  of  the 
ordinance  and  to  the  Congress  which  made  it  effective.  The 
Ordinance  of  1785  is  the  foundation  on  which  has  been  built  the 
national  land  system  of  the  United  States.  In  its  influence  upon 
subsequent  events  it  stands  second  to  no  act  of  the  Continental 
Congress  except,  perhaps,  the  Ordinance  of  1 787.  The  Ordinance 
of  1785  was  a  land  ordinance  and  its  influence  has  been  chiefly 
upon  land  policies  and  legislation.  Education  was  a  minor  con- 
sideration in  the  ordinance  and  the  mention  of  education  in  it 
was  merely  incident  to  the  sale  of  land  under  the  plan  embodied  in 
the  ordinance.  Regardless  of  the  intentions  of  the  committee 
who  framed  the  educational  provision,  or  of  the  Congress  which 
permitted  that  provision  to  stand  while  striking  out  the  similar 
provision  for  the  support  of  religion,  that  provision  which  re- 
served "the  lot  No.  16,  of  every  township,  for  the  maintenance  of 
public  schools,  within  the  said  township,"  set  a  precedent  the 
influence  of  which  has  been  far-reaching  in  the  development  of  the 
policy  of  dedicating  public  lands  to  public  education. 


20  Journals  of  American  Congress,  IV,  pp.  520-22.     The  ordinance  is  reprinted 
as  Appendix  A. 


CHAPTER  III 
THE  OHIO  COMPANY 

The  Ohio  Company,  organized  in  1786,  was  composed  largely 
of  New  England  officers  and  soldiers  of  the  continental  army. 
The  purpose  of  this  company  is  set  forth  in  the  articles  of  agree- 
ment which  were  adopted  in  the  organization  of  the  company. 
The  preamble  reads  as  follows:  "The  design  of  this  association  is 
to  raise  a  fund  in  continental  certificates  for  the  sole  purpose  and 
to  be  appropriated  to  the  entire  use  of  purchasing  lands  in  the 
western  territory  belonging  to  the  United  States,  for  the  benefit  of 
the  company  and  to  promote  a  settlement  in  that  country."  ^ 

The  history  of  the  Ohio  Company  begins  in  the  year  1776.  Its 
origin  can  be  definitely  traced  to  the  resolutions  of  Congress  of 
that  year,  which  granted  land  to  certain  officers  and  soldiers  of 
the  continental  army.  These  grants  were  supplemented  by 
further  grants  by  Congress  in  1780.  The  connection  between 
these  early  resolutions  and  the  Ohio  Company  is  found  in  (i)  the 
plans  evolved  during  the  year  1783  to  pay  the  indebtedness  to  the 
army,  (2)  the  Officers'  Petition,  and  (3)  the  Ordinance  of  1785. 

On  January  6,  1783,  a  group  of  army  officers  addressed  a  peti- 
tion to  Congress,^  asking  that  something  be  done  to  relieve  the 
distress  in  the  army  by  the  adjustment  of  all  dues.  As  Congress 
took  no  definite  action  on  this  petition,  later  in  this  same  year, 
Colonel  Timothy  Pickering,  General  Rufus  Putnam  and  other 
officers  developed  a  plan  by  which  the  debt  to  the  army  was  to  be 
paid  in  western  lands  as  provided  for  in  the  resolutions  of  Congress 
of  1776  and  1780.  Pickering  wrote  to  Hodgdon,  April  7,  1783,  as 
follows :  ' '  But  a  new  plan  is  in  contemplation — no  less  than  form- 
ing a  new  state  westward  of  the  Ohio.  Some  of  the  principal  offi- 
cers of  the  army  are  heartily  engaged  in  it. '  About  a  week  since, 
the  matter  was  set  on  foot,  and  a  plan  is  digesting  for  the  purpose. 
Enclosed  is  a  rough  draft  of  some  propositions  respecting  it,  which 
are  generally  approved  of.  They  are  in  the  hands  of  General 
Huntington  and  General  Putnam  for  consideration,  amendment, 


1  Cuder:  Life  of  Rev.  Manasseh  Cutler,  I,  p.  181. 

2  Bancroft:  I,  pp.  77-81;  copied  from  Journals  of  Congress,  IV,  p.  206. 


15 


1 6    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

and  addition.  ...  As  soon  as  the  plan  is  well  digested,  it  is 
intended  to  lay  it  before  an  assembly  of  the  officers,  and  to  learn 
the  inclination  of  the  soldiers.  If  it  takes,  an  application  will  then 
be  made  to  Congress  for  the  grant  and  all  things  depending  on 
them."^  This  draft  which  Pickering  sent  to  Hodgdon,  had  the 
following  title:  "Propositions  for  Settling  a  New  State  by  Such 
Officers  and  Soldiers  of  the  Federal  Army  as  Shall  Associate  for 
that  Purpose,"  and  contained  fifteen  propositions.^  The  most 
important  of  these  were  the  second,  which  provided  that  land 
should  "be  assigned  to  the  army  to  fulfill  the  engagements  of  the 
United  States  by  the  resolutions  of  the  i6th  of  September,  1776, 
August  13th  and  September  30th,  1780";  the  third,  which  pro- 
vided for  additional  grants  to  those  making  actual  settlement 
within  one  year;  the  seventh,  which  provided  that  "all  surplus 
lands  shall  be  the  common  property  of  the  state  and  disposed  of 
for  the  common  good;  as  for  laying  out  roads,  building  bridges, 
erecting  public  buildings,  establishing  schools  and  academies,  de- 
fraying the  expenses  of  government,  and  other  public  uses"; 
the  eleventh,  which  was:  "That  a  Constitution  for  the  new  state 
be  formed  by  the  members  of  the  association  previous  to  their 
commencing  the  settlement,  two  thirds  of  the  associates  present 
at  a  meeting  duly  notified  for  that  purpose  agreeing  therein.  The 
total  exclusion  of  slavery  from  the  state  to  form  an  essential  and 
irrevocable  part  of  the  constitution";  and  the  thirteenth,  which 
provided:  "That  the  State,  so  constituted,  shall  be  admitted  into 
the  confederacy  of  the  United  States,  and  entitled  to  all  the 
benefits  of  the  Union,  in  common  with  the  other  members  thereof." 
These  propositions  embodied  a  definite  plan  for  the  formation  of 
a  new  state,  to  be  admitted  to  the  Union  on  an  equality  with  the 
original  states.  It  is  evident  that  those  who  approved  these 
propositions  were  determined  to  fix  the  form  of  government  under 
which  they  were  to  live  before  moving  into  the  new  state.  This  is 
shown  in  the  provision  for  the  adoption  of  an  anti-slavery  state 
constitution  before  commencing  an  actual  settlement.  It  is  to  be 
noted,  also,  that  the  policy  of  using  money  derived  from  the  sale  of 
public  lands  for  the  establishment  of  public  schools  was  a  definite 
part  of  this  plan. 


3  Barrett:  Evolution  of  the  Ordinance  of  1787^  p.  7,  note  i,  copied  from  Pick- 
ering: Life  oj  Pickering,  I,  p.  457. 

<  Cutler:  I,  pp.  156-59,  printed  in  full. 


The  Ohio  Company  17 

While  the  army  officers  were  at  work  trying  to  devise  some  plan 
for  the  settlement  of  claims  of  the  army  against  the  government, 
Congress  was  not  indifferent  to  this  problem.  Theodoric  Bland 
and  Hamilton  both  wrote  Washington  for  advice  on  this  matter. 
April  4,  1783,  Washington  wrote  Bland  at  great  length.^  He 
said  in  part:  "I  fix  it  as  an  indispensable  measure  that,  previous 
to  the  disbanding  the  army,  all  their  accounts  be  liquidated  and 
settled."  He  urged  that  Congress  provide  for  at  least  one 
month's  pay  before  the  army  was  disbanded.  In  closing,  Wash- 
ington said :  "  Upon  the  whole,  you  will  be  able  to  collect  from  the 
foregoing  sentiments  what  are  the  expectations  of  the  army,  that 
they  will  involve  complete  settlement  and  partial  payment,  pre- 
vious to  any  dispersion."  Acting  upon  Washington's  advice,  on 
June  5,  1783,  Bland,  seconded  by  Hamilton,  introduced  an  ordi- 
nance^ in  Congress,  for  the  payment  of  the  army  debt  in  western 
lands.  The  chief  points  in  this  ordinance  were:  (i)  "in  lieu  of 
the  commutation  for  the  half  pay  of  the  army,  and  in  lieu  of  the 
arrearages  due  to  the  officers  and  soldiers, "  thirty  acres  of  land  in 
the  Ohio  country  be  granted  for  each  dollar  due,  over  and  above 
the  bounties  promised  in  the  resolutions  of  1776;  (2)  the  territory 
to  be  laid  off  in  districts  not  exceeding  two  degrees  of  latitude  and 
three  degrees  of  longitude,  and  each  district  to  be  laid  off  in  town- 
ships, the  surveys  at  the  expense  of  Congress;  (3)  each  of  the 
districts  shall,  when  it  contains  20,000  male  inhabitants,  become  a 
state  in  the  Union  on  an  equality  with  the  original  states;  (4) 
"out  of  every  one  hundred  thousand  acres  so  granted  there  shall 
be  reserved  as  a  domain  for  the  use  of  the  United  States  ten 
thousand  acres,  each  of  which  ten  thousand  acres  shall  remain 
forever  a  common  property  of  the  United  States,  unalienable  but 
by  the  consent  of  the  United  States  in  Congress  assembled;  the 
rents,  shares,  profits,  and  produce  of  which  lands,  when  any  shall 
arise,  to  be  appropriated  to  the  payment  of  the  civil  list  of  the 
United  States,  the  erecting  of  frontier  forts,  the  founding  of 
seminaries  of  learning,  and  the  surplus  after  such  purposes  (if  any) 
to  be  appropriated  to  the  building  and  equipping  a  navy,  and  to 
no  other  use  or  purpose  whatever";  (5)  "lands  so  granted  to  the 
officers  and  soldiers  shall  be  free  of  all  taxes  and  quit-rents  for  the 
space  of  seven  years  from  the  passing  this  ordinance. " 

5  Bancroft:  I,  pp.  302-07. 
"  Ihid.,  312-14. 


1 8    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

In  Bland's  motion,  the  effectiveness  of  this  ordinance  was  made 
contingent  upon  the  acceptance  of  the  Virginia  Cession  and  the 
approval  of  the  ordinance  by  the  army.  It  never  went  into  ef- 
fect, but  it  is  of  some  importance  because  it  contained  the  provi- 
sions for  the  formation  of  states  and  for  the  use  of  funds  derived 
from  public  lands  for  public  purposes,  especially  for  founding 
schools.  It  is  also  significant  for  what  it  did  not  contain.  No 
mention  is  made  of  the  form  of  state  government  to  be  set  up  or  of 
slavery.  Historically  this  is  known  as  the  "Financiers'  Plan." 
It  was  broader  than  the  plan  of  the  New  England  officers  who 
wanted  to  fix  upon  the  new  states,  which  they  purposed  to  estab- 
lish, the  institutions  of  New  England.  The  purpose  of  the 
"Financiers'  Plan"  was  to  make  a  settlement  with  the  whole 
army.  The  omission  of  provisions  concerning  slavery  and  the 
form  of  state  government  was  probably  not  unintentional.  Any 
provision  concerning  these  two  questions  was  likely  to  produce 
controversy  and  some  dissatisfaction.  It  is  not  unreasonable  to 
suppose  that  those  who  framed  this  ordinance  believed  it  wise  to 
leave  them  untouched,  and  thus  postpone  their  settlement  to  a 
later  day.  The  chief  purpose  of  this  ordinance  was  to  reduce  the 
public  debt ;  to  influence  the  political  or  institutional  development 
of  the  West  was  not  its  purpose.  It  therefore  contained  only 
those  provisions  that  were  likely  to  meet  with  general  approval 
and  be  attractive  to  the  army  creditors  of  the  United  States. 

In  both  the  "Army  Plan"  and  the  "Financiers'  Plan"  there 
was  a  provision  for  the  use  of  public  lands  for  the  establishment  of 
schools.  It  seems  that  this  was  coming  to  be  a  generally  accepted 
policy.  The  connections  in  which  these  provisions  for  public 
education  occur  are  rather  significant.  In  the  "Army  Plan"  it 
was  stipulated  that  "all  surplus  lands  shall  be  the  common  prop- 
erty of  the  state  and  disposed  of  for  the  common  good ;  as  for  lay- 
ing out  roads,  building  bridges,  erecting  public  buildings,  establish- 
ing schools  and  academies,  defraying  the  expenses  of  government, 
and  other  public  uses."  ^  Thus  the  establishment  of  schools  and 
academies  was  classed  with  the  building  of  highways  and  bridges, 
the  erection  of  public  buildings,  and  any  other  usual  public  ex- 
pense. Evidently  the  use  of  public  lands  for  educational  pur- 
poses was  not  considered  revolutionary.  In  the  "Financiers' 
Plan"  the  provision  for  "founding  of  seminaries  of  learning"  was 

'  Cutler:  I,  p.  157. 


The  Ohio  Company  19 

part  of  a  broader  provision  for  the  use  of  revenue  from  public 
lands  for  the  payment  of  the  civil  list  of  the  United  States,  erect- 
ing frontier  forts,  and  building  and  equipping  a  navy.^  The  civil 
list,  frontier  forts  and  seminaries  of  learning  were  given  precedence 
over  the  navy.  Here  again  education  was  included  with  usual 
and  necessary  expenses  of  government. 

There  is  one  important  difference  between  the  "Army  Plan" 
and  the  "Financiers'  Plan "  as  regards  the  public  domain.  In  the 
"Army  Plan  "  all  surplus  lands  were  to  be  the  common  property  of 
the  state.  The  "Financiers'  Plan"  provided  that  out  of  every 
hundred  thousand  acres  so  granted  there  should  be  reserved  as  a 
domain  for  the  use  of  the  United  States  ten  thousand  acres,  which 
should  "remain  forever  the  common  property  of  the  United 
States,  unalienable  but  by  the  consent  of  the  United  States  in 
Congress  assembled."  ^  The  one  put  the  support  of  public  educa- 
tion from  public  lands  under  state  control,  the  other  placed  the 
control  with  the  national  government.  This  difference  is  not 
surprising  in  the  light  of  the  fact  that  the  "Army  Plan  "  was  drawn 
up  by  those  who  expected  to  become  citizens  of  the  states  formed 
under  the  plan,  while  the  ** Financiers'  Plan"  was  the  work  of  those 
whose  chief  concern  was  the  interests  of  the  national  government. 

Neither  of  these  plans  became  operative,  but  they  were  im- 
portant steps  in  the  process  of  developing  a  means  to  carry  out  the 
promises  of  land  grants  to  the  army,  made  by  Congress  in  the 
resolutions  of  1776  and  1780,  and  to  liquidate  the  national  debt 
through  the  sale  of  western  lands.  The  failure  of  these  plans  to 
produce  action  in  Congress  moved  some  of  the  army  officers  to 
make  further  attempts  to  secure  the  formation  of  a  new  state  in 
the  Northwest.  General  Putnam,  who  had  been  active  in  promot- 
ing the  "Army  Plan,"  was  a  leader  in  this  new  attempt.  The  so- 
called  "Officers'  Petition "  was  drafted  and  signed  by  two  hundred 
eighty-five  officers  of  the  Continental  line.  This  petition  was  not 
long,  and  contained  no  very  definite  plans  for  the  government  of 
the  state  to  be  formed  or  for  the  disposal  of  public  lands  for  public 
purposes.  It  simply  asked  that  Congress  mark  out  a  tract  or 
Territory,  in  the  Ohio  country  just  west  of  Pennsylvania,  sub- 
sequently to  be  admitted  as  a  state  into  the  Union,  and  locate 
therein  the  lands  promised  to  the  army  by  the  resolution  of 

*  Bancroft:  I,  p.  313. 
« Ibid. 


20    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

September  20,  1776  and  subsequent  resolves,  and  that  provision 
be  made  for  further  grant  of  lands  to  such  of  the  army  as  wished 
to  become  adventurers  in  the  new  government. ^^ 

General  Putnam  sent  this  petition  to  Washington,  June  16, 
1 783,  with  the  request  that  he  send  it,  with  his  endorsement  to  the 
President  of  Congress.  As  has  been  pointed  out,  the  petition  was 
silent  as  regards  the  details  of  government  or  the  method  of  sur- 
vey and  disposal  of  the  lands.  The  petitioners,  however,  had 
very  definite  notions  about  these  matters.  In  his  letter  to  Wash- 
ington, General  Putnam  said:  "But  I  hasten  to  mention  some  of 
the  expectations  which  the  petitioners  have  respecting  the  condi- 
tions on  which  they  hope  to  obtain  the  lands — this  was  not  proper 
to  mention  in  the  body  of  the  petition."  ^^  Chief  among  these 
"expectations,"  which  Putnam  mentioned,  were  that  the  land 
be  surveyed  into  townships,  six  miles  square,  and  that  Congress 
take  necessary  steps  to  prevent  land  monopoly.  The  only  refer- 
ence to  education  was  incidental,  and  it  seems  to  have  been 
taken  as  a  matter  of  course  that  reservations  would  be  made  for 
schools  and  other  purposes.  Putnam  said:  " The  whole  tract  is 
supposed  to  contain  about  17,418,240  acres,  and  will  admit  of  756 
townships  of  six  miles  square,  allowing  to  each  township  3,040  for 
the  ministry,  schools,  waste  lands,  rivers,  ponds,  and  highways; 
then  each  township  will  contain,  of  settlers'  land,  20,000  acres,  and 
in  the  whole  15,120,000  acres."  ^^ 

On  June  17,  1783,  Washington  sent  the  Officers'  Petition  and  a 
copy  of  Putnam's  letter  to  the  President  of  Congress,  along  with  a 
letter  of  endorsement.^^  He  urged  that  Congress  act  favorably  on 
the  petition  on  the  ground  that  the  army  men  would  make  an  ideal 
frontier  population.  He  characterized  the  plan  as  the  "most 
rational  and  practicable  scheme  which  can  be  adopted  by  a  great 
proportion  of  the  officers  and  soldiers  of  our  army." 

Notwithstanding  the  reasonableness  of  the  petition  and  its 
strong  endorsement  by  Washington,  Congress  failed  to  act  upon 
it.  Nearly  a  year  later,  June  2,  1 784,  Washington  wrote  Putnam  ^* 
that  he  had  urged  the  matter  on  many  members  of  Congress  and 
all  had  seemed  favorably  inclined,  but  had  made  the  excuse  that 

^°  Bancroft:  I,  pp.  314-15. 

"  Cutler:  I,  p.  170.     The  letter  is  printed  in  full. 

i2  76ti.,  p.  171. 

"  Bancroft:  I,  pp.  315-17. 

"  This  letter  is  printed  in  full  in  Cutler:  I,  pp.  176-77. 


The  Ohio  Company  21 

Congress  could  not  cede  the  land  because  it  did  not  belong  to  the 
United  States.  He  added  that  since  that  excuse  had  been  made, 
Congress  had  accepted  the  Virginia  cession  and  had  resolved  to 
lay  off  ten  new  states.^^  Here  the  matter  rested  for  nearly  two 
years,  to  be  revived  by  the  formation  of  the  Ohio  Company. 

The  army  had  been  disbanded  in  June,  1783,  and  the  officers 
and  soldiers  were  dispersed.  General  Putnam  was  appointed  one 
of  the  surveyors  to  survey  the  first  seven  ranges,  as  provided  for  in 
the  Ordinance  of  1785.  He  resigned  this  position  and  made  a 
contract  with  Massachusetts  to  survey  ten  townships  in  Maine. 
General  Benjamin  Tupper,  who  had  signed  the  Officers'  Petition, 
was  then  appointed,  in  Putnam's  place,  to  assist  in  the  survey  in 
Ohio.  Putnam  was  not  favorably  impressed  with  Maine.  He  is 
reported  as  saying  of  it:  "That  country  in  general  is  not  fit  for 
cultivation,  and  when  this  idea  is  connected  with  the  climate,  a 
man  ought  to  consider  himself  curst  even  in  this  world,  who  is 
doomed  to  inhabit  there  as  a  cultivator  of  the  lands  only."^^ 
Tupper  returned  from  the  Northwest  in  1785  and  reported  that: 
"The  lands  in  that  quarter  are  of  a  much  better  quality  than  any 
other  known  to  the  New  England  people;  the  climate,  seasons, 
products,  etc.,  are  in  fact  equal  to  the  most  flattering  accounts 
that  have  been  published  of  them."  ^^ 

Tupper  and  Putnam  decided  to  revive  the  scheme  for  a  settle- 
ment of  army  men  in  the  Northwest.  To  this  end  they  issued, 
January  10,  1786,  a  circular  with  the  title  "  Information."  It  was 
addressed  to  "all  officers  and  soldiers  who  have  served  in  the  late 
war,  and  who  are  by  a  late  ordinance  of  the  honorable  Congress  to 
receive  certain  tracts  of  land  in  the  Ohio  country,  and  also  all  other 
good  citizens  who  wish  to  become  adventurers  in  that  delightful 
region."  ^^  This  circular  proposed  the  formation  of  a  company, 
composed  primarily  of  Massachusetts  people,  to  make  a  settlement 
in  the  Ohio  country.  In  order  to  form  the  company,  it  was  pro- 
posed that  all  those  interested  should  meet  in  their  respective 
counties,  February  15,  and  elect  delegates  to  meet  in  Boston  on 
March  i,  1786,  Such  meetings  were  held  and  the  delegates  met 
at  the  appointed  time.  Those  present  were  Winthrop  Sargent, 
John  Mills,  Manasseh  Cutler,  John  Brooks,  Thomas  Gushing, 

^  Washington  referred  to  the  Ordinance  of  April  23,  1784. 
"  Cutler:  I,  p.  179. 

18  Ihid.,  pp.  179-80;  printed  in  full. 


22    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

Benjamin  Tupper,  Crocker  Sampson,  Rufus  Putnam,  John  Patter- 
son, Jelaliel  Woodbridge,  and  Abraham^  Williams.  Of  these 
eleven,  five  had  signed  the  Officers'  Petition.  A  committee  com- 
posed of  Putnam,  Cutler,  Brooks,  Sargent,  and  Cushing,  was  ap- 
pointed to  draft  articles  of  agreement.  The  committee  reported 
thirteen  articles  of  agreement, ^^  which  were  adopted  March  3, 
1786,  and  the  Ohio  Company  was  thereby  created.  These 
articles  may  be  summarized  as  follows:  Articles  of  Agreement 
Entered  into  by  the  Subscribers  for  Constituting  an  Association 
by  the  Name  of  The  Ohio  Company : 

The  design  of  this  association  is  to  raise  a  fund  in  continental  certificates 
for  the  sole  purpose  and  to  be  appropriated  to  the  entire  use  of  purchasing 
lands  in  the  western  territory  belonging  to  the  United  States,  for  the  bene- 
fit of  the  Company,  and  to  promote  a  setdement  in  that  country. 

Article  i.  The  fund  not  to  exceed  $1,000,000  in  continental  specie 
certificates,  each  share  $1,000.00  in  continental  certificates  and  ten  dollars 
in  gold  or  silver. 

Article  2.  The  purchase  shall  be  made  in  one  of  the  proposed  states, 
northwest  of  the  Ohio  river,  under  the  terms  of  the  Ordinance  of  1785,  or 
any  other  terms  as  good. 

Article  3.     There  shall  be  five  directors,  a  treasurer,  and  secretary. 

Article  4.  Holders  of  twenty  shares  shall  constitute  one  grand  division 
of  the  company  and  elect  an  agent  to  act  for  them. 

Article  5.     The  subscribers  shall  draw  by  lot  for  their  lands. 

Article  6.     No  one  shall  hold  more  than  five  or  less  than  one  share. 

Article  7.     The  directors  shall  manage  the  affairs  of  the  company. 

Article  8.  The  agents  shall  appoint  the  directors,  treasurer,  and 
secretary. 

Article  9.     The  treasurer  shall  be  under  bond. 

Article  10.  The  directors  shall  be  under  bond  and  shall  divide  the  lands 
by  lot,  among  the  agents,  within  three  months  after  the  purchase. 

Article  11.  The  company  shall  proceed  with  the  undertaking,  even 
though  all  the  capital  stock  is  not  subscribed. 

Article  12.  The  directors  shall  seek  to  obtain  an  ordinance  of  incor- 
poration from  Congress,  or  an  act  of  incorporation  in  one  of  the  states. 

Article  13.  All  votes  may  be  in  person,  or  by  proxy,  in  proportion  to  the 
interest  represented. 

Subscription  books  were  opened  and  the  company  met  with 
considerable  success  almost  at  once.  On  April  20,  1786,  Dr. 
Cutler  wrote  to  Major  Sargent:  "The  present  prospects  for 
obtaining  subscriptions  in  this  part  of  the  country  so  much 


"Walker:  History  of  Athens  County,  Ohio,  pp.  48-50.     The  Articles  are 
printed  in  full  in  Cutler:  I,  pp.  184-86. 


The  Ohio  Company  23 

exceed  my  most  sanguine  expectations,  that  I  think  we  ought  to 
be  cautious  about  admitting  adventurers  from  the  southward."  ^^ 
By  the  following  March  only  two  hundred  fifty  shares  were 
subscribed  for,  subscriptions  having  been  retarded  because  of  the 
doubt  that  had  arisen  as  to  the  ability  of  the  company  to  obtain 
sufficient  land  for  a  large  collective  settlement.  A  meeting  of  the 
company  was  called  at  Boston,  March  8,  1787,  and  three  Direc- 
tors, General  Parsons,  General  Putnam  and  Dr.  Cutler,  were 
appointed  to  apply  to  Congress  for  the  private  purchase  of  lands.^^ 
Parsons  and  Putnam  were  in  charge  of  the  negotiations  with  Con- 
gress. On  March  16,  1787,  Dr.  Cutler  wrote  to  Major  Sargent: 
"The  high  price  at  which  Congress  have  set  their  lands  .  .  . 
operate  much  against  subscriptions  for  the  Company.  ...  A 
large  number  of  very  considerable  property  .  .  .  have  as- 
sured me  that,  as  almost  every  kind  of  business  is  stagnated  here, 
they  would  become  adventurers  .  .  .  and  remove  on  to  the 
lands,  provided  they  could  be  purchased  on  terms  as  advantageous 
as  those  sold  by  this  state.  .  .  .  But  if  Congress  should  pre- 
fer surveying  the  lands  at  their  own  expense,  I  should  not  be 
willing,  at  present,  to  offer  more  than  half  a  dollar  per  acre. "^^ 
Under  the  same  date,  he  wrote  a  letter ^^  to  Nathan  Dane,  a 
member  of  Congress  from  Massachusetts,  in  which  he  expressed 
the  hope  that  Congress  would  make  a  private  sale  to  the  Ohio 
Company,  notwithstanding  the  land  ordinance  of  1 785.  He 
pointed  out  the  fact  that  the  high  price  at  which  Congress  held 
the  lands  in  the  West  operated  against  their  sale  in  competition 
with  the  cheaper  state  lands.  Either  Dr.  Cutler  was  unduly  im- 
pressed with  the  superiority  of  New  Englanders  to  all  other 
Americans  or  he  was  playing  upon  the  sectional  pride  of  Mr. 
Dane,  when  he  wrote  the  following:  "An  immediate  and  great 
settlement  must  be  an  object  of  consequence  in  the  view  of  Con- 
gress, and  settlers  from  the  northern  states  in  which  this  company 
is  made  up,  are  undoubtedly  preferable  to  those  from  the  southern 
states.  They  will  be  men  of  more  robust  constitutions,  inured  to 
labor,  and  free  from  the  habits  of  idleness.  .  .  .  Many  of  the 
subscribers  are  men  of  very  considerable  property  and  respectable 
characters,  who  intend  (for  the  Company  will  admit  no  other)  to 

20  Cutler:  I,  p.  189. 

21  Ibid.,  pp.  191-92. 

22  Ibid.,  p.  193. 

23  Ibid.,  pp.  194-95. 


24    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

become  residents  in  that  country."  In  closing,  Cutler  very 
shrewdly  and  gently  brought  political  pressure  to  bear  on  Mr. 
Dane.  He  said:  "We  should  be  happy  in  obtaining  your  in- 
fluence in  favor  of  the  Company,  and  have  the  fullest  confidence  of 
your  readiness  to  second  the  wishes  of  so  large  a  number  of  the 
inhabitants  of  the  New  England  States,  so  far  as  it  is  consistent 
with  the  general  interest  of  the  Union." 

General  Parsons  had  presented  a  memorial  to  Congress  for  the 
purchase  of  lands  for  the  Company.  Evidently  he  acted  without 
the  full  cooperation  of  General  Putnam  and  Dr.  Cutler.  In  a 
letter  to  Major  Sargent,  dated  May  30,  1787,  they  said,  speaking 
for  the  company:  "We  cannot,  on  any  consideration,  accede  to 
the  location  proposed  by  him  (General  Parsons)  to  Congress,  as  it 
must  defeat  us  in  many  of  our  most  important  views."  ^^  It  also 
appears  from  this  letter  that  they  entertained  some  doubt  as  to 
the  attitude  of  the  Massachusetts  delegates  in  Congress  towards 
the  Ohio  Company,  and  also  as  to  singleness  of  motives  of  General 
Parsons.  They  said:  "We  think  some  caution  may  be  necessary 
in  placing  confidence,  particularly  with  respect  to  members  from 
this  commonwealth.  .  .  .  We  likewise  think  it  best,  as  there 
seems  to  be  ground  to  suppose  General  Parsons  may  have  views 
separate  from  the  interest  of  this  Company  in  his  proposal  for  a 
location,  that  he  should  have  no  information  of  our  desire  to  have 
it  in  another  place  until  we  have  opportunity  to  converse  with  him 
on  the  subject. "2^ 

With  the  affairs  of  the  Company  moving  slowly,  and  not  always 
in  the  right  direction,  it  was  decided  to  send  Dr.  Cutler  to  New 
York  to  carry  on  the  negotiations  with  Congress.  He  arrived 
there  on  Thursday,  July  5,  1787,  with  letters  of  introduction  to  the 
leading  members  of  Congress,  government  officials,  citizens  of 
New  York  and  Philadelphia.  Dr.  Cutler  began  work  at  once 
seeing  members  of  Congress  and  getting  his  papers  in  order  pre- 
paratory to  making  application  to  Congress  for  the  purchase  of 
lands.^^  Tuesday,  July  10,  he  dined  with  Colonel  Duer,  secretary 
of  the  Board  of  Treasury.  Among  the  guests  were  Samuel  Os- 
good, president  of  the  Board  of  Treasury  and  Major  Sargent,  of 
the  Ohio   Company.     In  his    diary   for   this   day  Dr.    Cutler 


2<  Cutler:  I,  p.  196. 

*  Ihid.,  pp.  196-97. 

*  Ibid.,  p.  229-30. 


The  Ohio  Company  25 

recorded:  "As  Congress  was  now  engaged  in  settling  the  form  of 
government  for  the  Federal  Territory,  for  which  a  bill  had  been 
prepared,  and  a  copy  sent  to  me,  with  the  leave  to  make  remarks 
and  propose  amendments,  and  which  I  had  taken  the  liberty  to 
remark  upon,  and  to  propose  several  amendments,  I  thought  this 
the  most  favorable  opportunity  to  go  on  to  Philadelphia."  ^^  He 
set  out  the  next  day  for  Philadelphia,  where  he  remained  a  short 
tim.e.  He  was  back  in  New  York  the  following  Tuesday,  July  17, 
and  the  next  morning  called  upon  General  St.  Clair,  president  of 
Congress,  and  was  in  conference  with  the  committee,  which  was  in 
charge  of  the  petition  of  the  Ohio  Company.  He  ate  dinner  with 
Mr.  Hillegas,  treasurer  of  the  United  States.^^  Thursday,  July 
19,  Dr.  Cutler  called  on  members  of  Congress  and  was  given  a 
copy  of  the  Ordinance  of  1787,  which  had  been  passed  during  his 
absence  at  Philadelphia.  Concerning  this  he  recorded  in  his 
diary :  "Was  furnished  with  the  Ordinance  establishing  a  Govern- 
ment in  the  Western  federal  Territory.  It  is  in  a  degree  new 
modeled.  The  amendments  I  proposed  have  all  been  made  ex- 
cept one,  and  that  is  better  qualified.  It  was,  that  we  should  not 
be  subject  to  Continental  taxation  until  we  were  entitled  to  a  full 
representation  in  Congress.  This  could  not  be  fully  obtained,  for 
it  was  considered  in  Congress  as  offering  a  premium  to  emigrants. 
They  have  granted  us  representation,  with  right  of  debating,  but 
not  of  voting,  upon  our  being  first  subject  to  taxation." ^^  The 
question  of  these  amendments  suggested  by  Dr.  Cutler,  has  pro- 
voked considerable  discussion.  Their  probable  content  and 
significance  will  be  taken  up  in  the  next  chapter. 

Dr.  Cutler  found  that  a  strong  opposition  to  his  proposition  had 
developed  during  his  absence.  It  is  not  improbable  that  the 
good  Doctor  revised  his  opinion,  expressed  to  Dane,  as  to  the  rela- 
tive merits  of  the  citizens  of  the  northern  states  and  the  men 
"from  the  southward."  He  found  that  the  strongest  advocates 
of  the  Ohio  Company  were  Grayson,  R.  H.  Lee,  and  Carrington, 
the  delegates  from  Virginia,  while  among  those  who  gave  him 
anxiety  were  the  delegates  from  Massachusetts.  On  this  point 
Cutler  made  the  following  record:  "As  there  are  a  number  in 
Congress  decidedly  opposed  to  my  terms  of  negotiation,  and  some 

2'  Cutler:  I,  p.  242.     The  ordinance  submitted  to  Cutler  for  criticism  was 
the  Ordinance  of  1787. 
28  Ibid.,  p.  292. 
2»  Ihid.,  p.  293. 


26    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

to  any  contract,  I  wish  now  to  ascertain  the  number  for  and 
against,  and  who  they  are,  and  must  then,  if  possible,  bring  the 
opponents  over.  This  I  have  mentioned  to  Colonel  Duer,  who 
has  promised  to  assist  me.  Grayson,  R.  H.  Lee,  and  Carrington 
are  certainly  my  warm  advocates.  Holton,  I  think,  may  be 
trusted.  Dane  must  be  carefully  watched,  notwithstanding  his 
professions.  Clarke,  Bingham,  Yates,  Kearney,  and  Few  are 
troublesome  fellows.^^  They  must  be  attacked  by  my  friends  at 
their  lodgings.  If  they  can  be  brought  over,  I  shall  succeed;  if 
not,  my  business  is  at  an  end."  ^^ 

This  same  day,  July  19,  Congress  passed  an  ordinance  authoriz- 
ing a  sale  to  the  Ohio  Company,  but  on  terms  which  were  wholly 
unsatisfactory  to  the  Company.  Dr.  Cutler  informed  the  com- 
mittee that  he  could  purchase  lands  from  some  of  the  states  on 
much  better  terms  and  preferred  to  do  so,  and  thereupon  proposed 
to  give  up  the  attempt  to  buy  of  Congress  and  to  leave  New  York. 
He  wrote  in  his  diary,  Friday,  July  20 :  "They  appeared  to  be  very 
sorry  no  better  terms  were  offered,  and  insisted  on  my  not  thinking 
of  leaving  Congress  until  another  attempt  was  made.  .  .  . 
They  assured  me  I  had  many  friends  in  Congress  who  would  make 
every  exertion  in  my  favor ;  that  it  was  an  object  of  great  magni- 
tude, and  (I)  must  not  expect  to  accomplish  it  in  less  than  two  or 
three  months.  .  .  .  Colonel  Duer  came  to  me  with  proposals 
from  a  number  of  the  principal  characters  in  the  city,  to  extend 
our  contract,  and  take  in  another  Company,  but  that  it  should  be 
kept  a  profound  secret.  He  explained  the  plan  they  had  con- 
certed and  offered  generous  conditions,  if  I  would  accomplish  the 
business  for  them.  The  plan  struck  me  agreeably.  ...  I 
was  convinced  it  best  for  me  to  hold  up  the  idea  of  giving  up  a 
contract  with  Congress.  .  .  .  This  appeared  to  have  the  ef- 
fect I  wished.  The  Committee  were  mortified,  and  did  not  seem 
to  know  what  to  say,  but  still  urged  another  attempt.  .  .  . 
Promised  Duer  to  consider  his  proposals.  ...  I  spent  the 
evening  (closeted)  with  Colonel  Duer,  and  agreed  to  purchase 
more  land,  if  terms  can  be  obtained,  for  another  Company,  which 
will  probably  forward  the  negotiations."^^ 

Cutler  was  correct  in  his  expectation  that  the  business  of  the 

»o  Holton  and  Dane,  Mass.;  Clarke,  N.  J.;   Bingham,  Pa.;  Yates,  N.  Y.; 
Kearney,  Del.;  Few,  Ga. 
31  Cutler:  I,  pp.  293-94. 
«2  Ibid.,  pp.  294-96. 


The  Ohio  Company  27 

Ohio  Company  would  progress  more  rapidly  after  his  agreement 
with  Colonel  Duer.  The  next  day  several  members  of  Congress 
called  upon  him  and  informed  him  that  Congress  was  much  more 
favorable  to  his  proposition,  since  they  had  learned  that  he  was 
inclined  to  cease  his  efforts  with  Congress.  Cutler  still  affected 
indifference  and  talked  a  great  deal  about  the  advantages  of  mak- 
ing the  purchase  from  one  of  the  states.  He  finally  told  the  mem- 
bers of  Congress  that  if  Congress  would  accede  to  the  terms  he  had 
proposed,  he  would  extend  the  purchase  to  the  tenth  township 
from  the  Ohio  and  to  the  Scioto  River  inclusively,  thereby  enabling 
Congress  to  pay  about  four  million  dollars  of  the  national  debt.^^ 
This  was  on  Saturday.  Cutler,  Duer,  Sargent,  and  their  friends 
in  Congress  made  personal  efforts  to  win  over  those  in  opposition 
to  making  the  sale  to  the  Company.  The  following  Monday, 
July  23,  the  proposition  was  debated  in  Congress  and  a  better 
ordinance  passed,  empowering  the  Board  of  Treasury  to  make  a 
contract.^^  The  conditions  of  this  ordinance  were  not  wholly  ac- 
ceptable to  Cutler  and  his  associates,  so  they  asked  Congress, 
through  the  Board  of  Treasury  to  make  the  desired  changes. 
Monday  night.  Cutler  was  in  conference  with  Grayson  and  other 
"members  of  Congress  from  the  southward  who  were  in  favor  of  a 
contract."  The  entry  in  Cutler's  diary  concerning  this  confer- 
ence throws  much  light  on  the  whole  situation :  "  Having  found  it 
impossible  to  support  General  Parsons  as  a  candidate  for  Gover- 
nor after  the  interest  that  General  St.  Clair  had  secured,  and  sus- 
pecting that  this  might  be  some  impediment  in  the  way — for  my 
endeavors  to  make  interest  for  him  were  well  known — and  the 
arrangement  of  civil  officers  being  on  the  carpet,  I  embraced  this 
opportunity  frankly  to  declare  that,  for  my  own  part,  and  ventured 
to  engage  for  Major  Sargent,  that  if  General  Parsons  could  have 
the  appointment  of  the  first  Judge,  and  Sargent  Secretary,  we 
should  be  satisfied,  and  I  heartily  wished  his  Excellency  General 
St.  Clair  might  be  the  Governor,  and  that  I  would  solicit  the 
eastern  members  to  favor  such  an  arrangement."^^  It  was  sug- 
gested that  Cutler  be  appointed  one  of  the  Judges,  but,  to  the 
surprise  of  the  members  of  Congress,  he  declined  to  be  considered 
for  any  office.     However,  in  the  interests  of  the  Ohio  Company, 


33  Cutler:  I,  p.  296. 
^  Ibid.,  p.  297. 
36  Ibid.,  p.  298. 


28    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

he  suggested  that  General  Putnam  be  named  as  one  of  the  Judges. 
It  is  evident  that  the  members  of  the  Ohio  Company  were  as 
vitally  interested  in  the  political  organization  of  the  Northwest  as 
they  were  in  the  terms  on  which  they  purchased  their  lands. 

On  Thursday  Cutler  spent  some  time  with  General  St.  Clair, 
who  appeared  very  friendly,  but  told  Cutler  he  must  expect  op- 
position to  his  request  for  further  changes  in  the  conditions  of  sale. 
St.  Clair  assured  him,  however,  that  he  would  use  his  influence  to 
have  his  terms  accepted.^^  Cutler  recorded  in  his  diary  for  that 
day:  "  I  was  now  fully  convinced  that  it  was  good  policy  to  give 
up  Parsons,  and  openly  to  appear  solicitous  that  St.  Clair  might  be 
appointed  governor.  Several  gentlemen  have  told  me  that  our 
matters  went  on  much  better  since  St.  Clair  and  his  friends  had 
been  informed  that  we  had  given  up  Parsons  and  that  I  had 
solicited  the  eastern  members  in  favor  of  his  appointment."^' 
St.  Clair's  biographer  ^^  has  denied  the  implication  that  General 
St.  Clair  was  induced  to  change  his  attitude  towards  the  Ohio 
Company  by  the  promise  of  political  support  from  New  England. 
General  William  Irvine,  a  member  of  Congress  and  a  close  per- 
sonal friend  of  St.  Clair's,  wrote  a  letter  from  New  York  to  Gen- 
eral Richard  Butler,  July  19,  1787,  in  which  he  said:  "The  Presi- 
dent^^ and  myself  arrived  here  last  Tuesday  morning,  in  time  to 
take  our  seats  the  same  day,  and  make  up,  at  the  same  time,  nine 
states.  The  inclosed  Ordinance  ^^  had  passed  two  days  before. 
Who  the  officers  of  that  government  will  be  I  have  not  heard  nor 
inquired."  ^^  Beyond  question,  it  seems  strange  that  a  close  friend 
of  St.  Clair's  should  not  have  heard  of  a  movement  on  foot  to  make 
him  Governor  of  the  Northwest  Territory.  Of  course  it  is  pos- 
sible that  the  sentiment  in  favor  of  St.  Clair  developed  between 
the  nineteenth  and  twenty- third  of  July,  the  day  on  which  Cutler 
said  the  appointment  of  the  civil  officers  was  "on  the  carpet." 

Regardless  of  the  causes,  the  opposition  to  Cutler's  terms  was 
overcome.  Even  Kearney,  whom  Cutler  characterized  as  "that 
stubborn  mule  of  a  Kearney,"  ^^  was  won  over.     Duer,  Sargent, 


36  Cutler:  I,  p.  301. 

37  Ihid.,  p.  301. 

38  W.  H.  Green  in  The  St.  Clair  Papers,  I,  pp.  126-29. 

39  General  St.  Clair  was  President  of  Congress. 
*°  Northwest  Ordinance  of  1787. 

*^  Green:  St.  Clair  Papers,  I,  p.  604. 
<2  Cutler:  I,  p.  301. 


The  Ohio  Company  29 

and  Cutler  decided  to  make  one  final  attempt  to  get  favorable 
action  in  Congress,  and  in  case  of  failure  to  abandon  efforts  until 
the  delegates  from  Connecticut,  Rhode  Island,  and  Maryland 
could  be  induced  to  attend  Congress.  On  Friday,  July  27,  Cutler 
packed  his  baggage,  paid  his  respects  to  the  members  of  Congress, 
and  told  them  he  had  little  hope  of  obtaining  a  contract,  but 
would  await  the  action  of  Congress  that  day  before  leaving."^^  At 
half  past  three,  he  was  informed  that  Congress  had  passed  an- 
other ordinance,  meeting  every  demand  of  the  Ohio  Company, 
and  had  authorized  the  Board  of  Treasury  to  close  the  contract. 
In  his  diary  for  that  day  Cutler  recorded :  "  By  this  Ordinance  we 
obtained  the  grant  of  near  5,000,000  of  acres  of  land,  amounting 
to  three  millions  and  a  half  of  dollars,  one  million  and  a  half  of 
acres  for  the  Ohio  Company,  and  the  remainder  for  a  private 
speculation,  in  which  many  of  the  principal  characters  in  America 
are  concerned.  Without  connecting  this  speculation,  similar 
terms  and  advantages  could  not  have  been  obtained  for  the  Ohio 
Company.  Cutler  left  New  York  at  once.  The  contract  of  the 
Ohio  Company  with  the  Board  of  Treasury  for  1,500,000  acres 
was  signed  by  Cutler  and  Sargent  October  27,  1787.'^'^  On  the 
same  day  they  signed  another  contract  for  the  Scioto  Company 
with  the  Board,  under  which  the  Company  was  given  the  option 
to  purchase  between  3,500,000  and  5,000,000  acres. 

During  the  short  period  that  Dr.  Cutler  was  laboring  with 
Congress  two  measures  of  far-reaching  importance  were  passed. 
One  was  the  Ordinance  for  the  Government  of  the  Territory  of 
the  United  States  Northwest  of  the  River  Ohio,  of  July  13,  1787, 
and  the  other  was  the  Ordinance  of  July  2'j,  which  authorized  the 
contract  with  the  Ohio  Company  and  fixed  the  conditions  of  the 
sale.  The  next  two  chapters  will  show  the  significance  of  these 
measures  for  public  education. 


^3  Cutler:  I,  p.  303. 
*^  Treat:  p.  50. 


CHAPTER   IV 

THE  ORDINANCE  OF  1787  AND  THE  NATIONAL 
LAND  POLICY 

The  purpose  of  the  ordinance  of  July  13,  1787,  was  to  establish 
a  government  in  the  Northwest  Territory.  It  was  not,  strictly 
speaking,  a  land  ordinance,  but  it  has  become  so  inseparably  as- 
sociated, historically,  with  the  ordinances  for  the  sale  of  the  fed- 
eral lands  in  the  Northwest  that  no  discussion  of  the  land  ordi- 
nances would  be  complete  without  showing  the  relation  of  this 
governmental  ordinance  to  the  development  of  the  federal  land 
policy. 

The  most  essential  point  of  contact  between  the  land  ordinances 
and  this  ordinance  for  the  establishment  of  a  government  in  the 
Northwest  is  to  be  found  in  the  fact  that  the  ordinance  for  govern- 
ment contained  certain  fundamental  principles  which  were 
deemed,  by  Americans  generally,  to  be  absolutely  necessary  to  hu- 
man happiness  and  freedom.  Without  the  incorporation  of  these 
fundamental  principles  of  government  into  the  organic  law  of  the 
western  territory  no  land  ordinance,  however  attractive  its  terms, 
could  have  been  very  successful  in  furthering  the  sale  of  lands  and 
promoting  settlement  in  the  back  country.  Among  the  govern- 
mental principles  that  had  become  generally  accepted  by  1787 
there  were  two  of  special  significance.  One  was  that  the  unoc- 
cupied federal  lands  should  be  organized  into  states  that  should 
eventually  be  admitted  into  the  Union  on  an  equality  with  the 
original  states  of  the  Union.  The  other  principle  was  that  federal 
lands  should  be  used  for  the  support  of  education.  These  points 
have  already  been  brought  out  more  or  less  clearly  in  the  preced- 
ing chapters,  but  a  brief  review  of  the  development  of  these  prin- 
ciples will  not  be  out  of  place  here. 

It  appears  from  the  Journals  of  Congress,  in  a  report  of  the 
Committee  on  Lands,  May  i,  1782,  that  Great  Britain  had 
contemplated  the  formation  of  a  separate  colony  west  of  the  Alle- 
ghany Mountains  at  the  time  of  the  establishment  of  the  Procla- 
mation Line  of  1763.  The  Committee  report  contained  the 
following  with  reference  to  the  Virginia  claims:  "  It  appeared  that, 

30 


The  Ordinance  of  lySy  and  the  National  Land  Policy        31 

in  the  year  1763,  a  very  large  part  thereof  was  separated  and 
appointed  for  a  distinct  government  and  colony  by  the  King  of 
Great  Britain  with  the  knowledge  and  approbation  of  the  govern- 
ment of  Virginia."^  The  Quebec  Act  of  1774  was  further  evi- 
dence of  the  intention  of  Great  Britain  to  separate,  govern- 
mentally,  the  country  west  of  the  Alleghany  Mountains  from  the 
sea-board  colonies.  The  reasons  for  this  policy  of  Great  Brit- 
ain's are  of  no  consequence  here. 

After  the  break  with  England  the  idea  of  forming  states  in  the 
back  country  continued  to  grow.  In  1779,  Maryland  had  taken 
her  stand  for  nationalizing  all  the  unsettled  western  lands  and  the 
establishment  of  **free,  convenient,  and  independent  governments, 
in  such  manner  and  at  such  times"  ^  as  the  wisdom  of  Congress 
should  direct.  The  following  year  Congress  resolved,  October 
10,  that  the  lands  ceded  to  the  Union  by  the  States  should  be 
"settled  and  formed  into  distinct  republican  states,"  which  should 
"become  members  of  the  federal  union,  and  have  the  same  rights 
of  sovereignty,  freedom,  and  independence,  as  the  other  states."' 
About  two  years  later,  May  i,  1782,  a  committee  on  lands,  to 
whom  had  been  referred  the  state  land  cessions  and  petitions  of 
the  early  land  companies,  included  in  their  report  the  following 
resolution:  "Resolved,  That  whenever  the  United  States  in  Con- 
gress assembled,  shall  find  it  for  the  good  of  the  Union  to  permit 
new  settlements  on  unappropriated  lands,  they  will  erect  a  new 
state  or  states,  to  be  taken  into  the  federal  union,  in  such  manner 
that  no  one  state  so  erected  shall  exceed  the  quantity  of  130  miles 
square,  and  the  sam^  shall  be  laid  out  into  Townships  of  the 
quantity  of  about  six  miles  square."  *  On  the  recommendation  of 
this  committee  Congress  further  resolved  to  make  good  all  reason- 
able engagements  for  lands  to  the  officers  and  soldiers  as  soon  as 
such  state  or  states  were  erected. 

During  the  winter  of  1782-83  the  "Army  Plan"  and  the 
^'Financiers'  Plan"  were  developed.  Both  of  these  plans  con- 
tained as  an  essential  feature  the  provision  for  the  formation  of  a 
new  state.  The  thirteenth  of  the  following  September  a  com- 
mittee in  Congress  made  the  following  report,  with  reference  to 


1  Journal  of  the  Continental  Congress,  XXII,  p.  227. 

2  Ibid.,  XIV.  p.  622. 
3/6i(/.,  XVIII,p.  915. 
*/W(/.,  XXIII.p.  231. 


32    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

Virginia  cession,  which  was  adopted:  "That  the  territory  so 
ceded  should  be  laid  out  and  formed  into  states  containing  a 
suitable  extent  of  territory,  not  less  than  lOO  nor  more  than  150 
miles  square,  or  as  near  thereto  as  circumstances  will  admit;  and 
that  the  states  so  formed  should  be  distinct  republican  states, 
and  admitted  members  of  the  Federal  Union,  having  the  same 
rights  of  sovereignty,  freedom,  and  independence,  as  the  other 
states."^  The  language  here  is  almost  identical  with  that  of  the 
motion  carried  in  Congress,  September  6,  1780,^  and  with  the 
resolution  of  October  10,  1780.^  The  Virginia  resolutions  for  the 
cession  of  lands  northwest  of  the  Ohio,  made  January  2,  1781,^ 
and  the  final  deed  of  cession,  accepted  by  Congress,  March  i, 
1784,^  contained  this  same  provision. 

The  next  important  measure  in  which  was  incorporated  the 
principle  of  forming  new  states  out  of  the  federal  lands  was  the 
ordinance  of  April  23,  1784.  As  was  shown  in  an  earlier  chapter, 
the  enactment  of  this  ordinance  made  necessary  a  better  plan  for 
the  sale  of  western  lands.  The  next  attempt  of  any  consequence 
to  meet  this  need  was  the  enactment  of  the  land  ordinance  of 
May  20,  1785.  There  was  nothing  in  this  ordinance  concerning 
the  formation  of  states,  but  the  absence  of  such  provision  may  be 
explained  by  the  fact  that  the  ordinance  of  1784  had  provided  for 
the  formation  of  states,  that  should  be  admitted  into  the  Union 
on  an  equality  with  the  original  states.  This  ordinance  was  in 
effect  in  1785,  and  the  land  ordinance  of  May  20,  of  that  year  was 
passed  to  supplement  the  ordinance  of  the  previous  year  for  the 
government  of  the  unoccupied  federal  territory. ^^ 

From  1785  to  1787  various  minor  attempts  were  made  to 
change  the  provisions  of  government  in  the  ordinance  of  1784. 
These  attempts  finally  culminated  in  the  famous  Ordinance  of 
July  13,  1787.  Just  what  the  forces  were  which  produced  this 
ordinance  will  be  shown  after  a  brief  review  of  the  development  of 
the  principle  that  public  lands  should  be  used  for  the  support  of 
education. 

The  origin  of  the  system  of  land  grants  for  education  has  been 


*  Cutler:  I,  p.  337,  citing  the  Jour,  of  Cont.  Cong, 
«  Jour,  of  Cont.  Cong.,  XVII,  p.  808. 

'  Ibid.,  XVIII,  p.  915- 

*  Hening:  Statutes  at  Large,  X,  p.  564-67. 

Ubid.,  XI,  p.  571-75- 

1°  Barrett:  Evolution  of  the  Ordinance  of  1787,  p.  27. 


The  Ordinance  of  lySy  and  the  National  Land  Policy        33 

traced  by  some^^  back  to  the  mediaeval  church  foundations  in 
England.  If  all  the  facts  were  known,  it  is  not  impossible  that 
the  beginnings  of  land  grants  for  schools  would  be  found  in  ancient 
times.  Church  schools  supported  wholly  or  in  part  by  the 
revenue  from  church  lands  were  old  and  well  established  institu- 
tions in  the  days  of  Henry  VIII.^^  The  connection  between  these 
mediaeval  foundations  and  system  of  land  grants  for  education, 
which  developed  in  America,  is  somewhat  remote.  It  is  probable 
that  the  land  foundations  for  church  schools  in  England  served  as 
a  precedent  in  the  early  colonial  period;  but  the  differences  be- 
tween these  foundations  in  England  and  the  system  which  de- 
veloped in  America  are  so  great  that  it  is  doubtful  that  any  vital 
connection  existed.  The  policy  of  making  land  grants  for 
education  in  colonial  times  was  almost  exclusively  a  New  England 
policy  and  seems  to  have  developed  with  the  custom  of  "  township 
planting."  The  few  charity  schools  that  were  founded  in  Virginia 
and  other  southern  colonies  were  perhaps  more  closely  connected, 
historically,  with  the  English  foundations  for  education  than  were 
the  early  New  England  land  grants  for  schools.  The  abundance 
of  land  and  the  scarcity  of  other  means  of  support  are  probably 
sufficient  explanations  for  the  early  New  England  land  grants  for 
education.  Almost  from  the  very  foundation  of  the  Massa- 
chusetts Bay  Colony  the  General  Court  of  the  colony,  as  well  as 
the  towns,  made  land  grants  for  the  support  of  schools.^^  By  1783 
the  policy  of  making  land  grants  for  education  was  established 
throughout  New  England  and  in  New  York. 

In  the  southern  colonies  the  idea  was  prevalent  that  public 
schools  were  charity  institutions  for  paupers  and  dependents. 
Washington  gave  expression  to  this  common  sentiment  when  he 
declared  to  Randolph  his  intention  to  use  the  income  from  his 
shares  in  the  companies  for  the  navigation  of  the  James  and 
Potomac  rivers  to  create  a  fund  ''on  which  to  establish  two 
charity  schools,  one  on  each  river,  for  the  education  and  support 
of  the  children  of  the  poor  in  this  country,  particularly  the  chil- 
dren of  those  men  of  this  description  who  have  fallen  in  the  de- 
fence of  the  rights  and  liberties  of  it."  ^^ 

In  1671,  the  Lands  Commissioners  had  inquired  of  Governor 

^^  Schafer:  The  Origin  of  the  System  of  Land  Grants  for  Education,  pp.  7-10. 
12  See  Leach:  English  Schools  at  the  Reformation. 

1'  Schafer:  loc.  cit.  Schafer  cites  the  original  colonial  and  town  records. 
"Sparks:  IX,  p.  116. 


34    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

Berkeley,  of  Virginia  as  to  what  course  was  taken  "about  the  in- 
structing of  the  people,  within  your  government,  in  the  Christian 
religion."  ^^  Berkeley's  memorable  reply  has  made  him  notorious 
in  history.  It  was:  ".  .  .  I  thank  God,  there  are  no  free 
schools  nor  printing,  and  I  hope  we  shall  not  have  these  hundred 
years;  for  learning  has  brought  disobedience,  and  heresy,  and 
sects  into  the  world,  and  printing  has  divulged  them,  and  libels 
against  the  best  government.  God  keep  us  from  both!"^^  As 
far  as  free  schools  were  concerned,  the  good  Governor's  devout 
hope  was  practically  realized.  In  1771  free  public  schools  were 
unknown  in  Virginia  except  for  charity. 

It  may  be  well  to  add  in  this  connection  that  public  sentiment  in 
Virginia  in  1771  was  not  opposed  to  education  as  Berkeley  had 
been  a  century  before.  There  is  at  least  one  case  on  record  in 
which  Virginia  adopted  the  policy  of  making  land  grants  for  edu- 
cation. In  1780  the  General  Assembly  reserved  eight  thousand 
acres  of  lands  in  the  county  of  Kentucky  "for  the  purpose  of  a 
publick  school,  or  seminary  of  learning,  to  be  erected  within  the 
said  county."  ^^  It  thus  appears  that  land  grants  for  education 
were  common  in  the  northern  colonies  and  not  wholly  unknown  in 
the  South  by  the  close  of  the  Revolutionary  War. 

In  the  "Army  Plan"  for  the  payment  of  the  debt  to  the  officers 
and  soldiers  this  principle  of  land  grants  for  schools  was  found  .^* 
It  is  interesting  to  note  that  this  plan,  so  largely  the  work  of  New 
Englanders,  did  not  contain  any  provision  for  land  grants  for  the 
support  of  religion.  From  the  earliest  times  in  New  England  the 
support  of  education  had  been  almost  invariably  associated  with 
the  support  of  the  ministry,  but  in  the  "Army  Plan"  the  school 
lost  its  historic  companion  and  became  associated  with  highways, 
bridges  and  public  buildings.  Although,  under  the  more  devout 
leadership  of  Dr.  Cutler,  New  Englanders  in  the  Ohio  Company 
again  advocated  land  grants  for  the  support  of  religion  along  with 
those  for  the  support  of  education,  it  is  possible  that  the  omission 
from  the  "Army  Plan"  of  a  provision  for  the  support  of  religion 
but  fore-shadowed  the  inevitable  separation  of  church  and  state- 
supported  schools  in  a  democracy  founded  upon  the  principle  of 
separation  of  church  and  state. 

"  Hening:  Statutes  at  Large,  II,  p.  517. 

i«m(f.,  II,  p.  517. 

"  Ibid.,  X,  p.  287. 

18  Pickering:  Life  of  Timothy  Pickering,  I,  p.  548. 


The  Ordinance  of  1787  and  the  National  Land  Policy        35 

The  "Financiers'  Plan"  of  1783  contained  the  provision  for 
land  grants  for  the  support  of  "seminaries  of  learning."  ^^  Neither 
religion  nor  slavery  was  mentioned  in  this  plan.  This  plan  was 
presented  by  Bland,  of  Virginia,  and  the  phrase  "seminaries  of 
learning"  is  the  same  that  had  been  used  in  the  Virginia  grant  for 
education  in  Kentucky  in  1780.  On  the  face  of  it  this  seems  to  be 
a  provision  for  the  support  of  higher  or  secondary  education,  but 
it  is  difficult  to  know  whether  those  who  advocated  this  measure 
were  consciously  discriminating  against  lower  schools  or  not. 
It  is  probable  that  the  expression  "seminaries  of  learning"  was 
used  to  cover  education  in  general,  without  any  definite  idea  as  to 
the  nature  of  the  particular  schools  to  be  established.  As  the 
plan  was  not  adopted,  what  would  have  happened  if  a  "seminary 
of  learning"  had  undertaken  to  do  elementary  or  grammar  school 
work  will  never  be  known.  However,  it  is  doubtful  if  such  pro- 
cedure would  have  ever  been  questioned. 

The  next  important  step  in  the  development  of  the  policy  of 
land  grants  for  education  was  in  connection  with  the  Officers' 
Petition  of  June  16,  1783.  The  petition  itself  was  silent  on  this 
point,  but  Putnam's  letter  to  Washington,  which  was  sent  to 
Congress  with  the  petition,  referred  to  allowances  in  each  town- 
ship "for  the  ministry,  schools,  waste  lands,  rivers,  ponds,  and 
high-ways."  20  Putnam  and  the  other  petitioners  did  not  think  it 
necessary  to  urge  Congress  to  make  land  grants  for  education. 
It  was  taken  for  granted  that  Congress  would  do  so. 

The  Ordinance  of  April  23,  1784,^1  was  an  ordinance  for  the 
government  of  the  federal  territory,  and  therefore  contained 
nothing  as  regards  the  disposal  of  the  lands.  That  question 
was  to  be  dealt  with  in  a  separate  ordinance.^^  A  committee 
which  was  composed  of  Jefferson,  of  Virginia;  Williamson,  of 
North  Carolina;  Howell,  of  Rhode  Island;  Gerry,  of  Massachu- 
setts; and  Read,  of  South  Carolina ;2^  reported  a  land  ordinance, 
May  7,  1784.^'^  Three  weeks  later  Congress  voted  to  postpone 
action  on  the  committee  report  and  nothing  was  done  with  it 
until  the  following  year.^^ 

18  Bancroft:  I,  p.  313. 

20  Cutler:  I,  p.  171. 

21  Old  South  Leaflets,  V.  6,  No.  127. 

22  Bancroft:  I,  p.  356. 

2' Treat:  p.  26,  citing  Jour,  oj  Am.  Cong.,  IV,  p.  416. 
24  Bancroft:  I,  p.  158. 
^  Treat:  p.  27. 


36    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

There  was  no  provision,  in  this  ordinance  reported  by  Jeffer- 
son's committee,  for  grants  for  education  or  reHgion.  Gerry,  the 
Massachusetts  member  of  the  committee,  sent  a  draft  of  the 
proposed  ordinance  to  Timothy  Pickering.  Gerry  was  not  in 
Congress  when  the  ordinance  was  up  for  discussion  in  March, 
1785,  so  Pickering  sent  his  criticism  of  the  ordinance  to  Rufus 
King,  one  of  the  delegates  from  Massachusetts.  Pickering's  chief 
objection  to  the  ordinance  was  that  it  did  not  provide  for  grants 
for  education  and  religion. ^^  The  only  importance  of  this  ordi- 
nance reported  in  1784,  is  that  it  was  the  one  serious  plan  for  the 
sale  of  unoccupied  federal  lands  which  did  not  contain  a  provision 
for  land  grants  for  education.  This  ordinance  was  never  voted 
upon  by  Congress.  After  much  debate  it  was  referred  to  a  new 
committee,  composed  of  one  member  from  each  state,  which  un- 
der the  leadership  of  Grayson, ^^  of  Virginia,  completely  revised 
the  ordinance.  The  report  of  this  committee,  after  amendment, 
became  the  Ordinance  of  May  20,  1785. 

Pickering's  influence  with  the  committee  was  shown  especially 
in  the  provisions  for  land  grants  for  education  and  religion  in  the 
reported  ordinance.^^  As  has  been  pointed  out  in  another  con- 
nection the  provision  for  religion  was  stricken  out  by  amendment 
on  the  grounds  that  it  connected  the  church  with  the  state.^^ 
There  was  no  objection  to  the  provision  for  land  grants  for  educa- 
tion. Bancroft  says:  "The  reservation  for  the  support  of 
schools,  received  a  general  welcome."  ^^  This  welcome  may  be 
explained,  not  only  on  the  grounds  that  these  grants  would  assist 
materially  In  the  sale  of  the  lands,  but  also  by  the  fact  that  land 
grants  for  the  support  of  schools  had  come  to  be  a  generally  ac- 
cepted policy  in  1785. 

There  remains  but  one  other  point  for  discussion  in  this  review 
of  the  development  of  the  policy  of  granting  lands  for  the  support 
of  schools.     That  is  the  early  attitude  of  the  Ohio  Company  to- 

^  Pickering:  Life  of  Pickering,  I,  p.  506. 

27  Bancroft:  I,  p.  180. 

28  See  page  11  for  Pickering's  influence;  also  see  Pickering:  I,  p.  511. 

29  Bancroft:  I,  p.  18 1.  On  this  point  Treat  says:  "The  question  was  put, 
Shall  the  words  stand?  Five  states  favored  retention,  two  opposed,  two  were 
divided,  and  three  were  not  sufficiently  represented  to  cast  a  vote.  As  seven 
states  did  not  support  the  motion,  it  was  lost,  and  the  words  stricken  out,  al- 
though seventeen  of  the  members  present  favored  and  only  six  opposed.  If  the 
question  had  been  put  in  a  different  way:  Shall  the  words  be  stricken  out?  it 
could  not  have  carried."     Treat:  p.  36.     See  also,  Cutler:  I,  p.  124. 

30  Bancroft:  I,  p.  181. 


The  Ordinance  of  I'/Sy  and  the  National  Land  Policy        37 

wards  such  grants.  The  Articles  of  Agreement,  adopted  for  the 
creation  of  the  company,  contained  no  definite  statement  of  the 
conditions  on  which  the  company  would  purchase  lands.  It  seems 
that  the  expectation  was  that  the  purchase  would  be  made  on  the 
terms  of  the  Ordinance  of  May  20,  1785.  The  second  of  the  Arti- 
cles of  Agreement  stated  that  the  funds  of  the  company  should  be 
"applied  to  the  purchase  of  lands  in  some  one  of  the  proposed 
states  north-westerly  of  the  river  Ohio,  as  soon  as  those  lands  are 
surveyed  and  exposed  for  sale  by  the  Commissioners  of  Congress, 
according  to  the  ordinance  of  that  honorable  body,  passed  the 
twentieth  of  May,  1785,  or  on  any  other  plan  that  may  be  adopted 
by  Congress,  not  less  advantageous  to  the  company."  ^^  In  1786 
the  Ordinance  of  1785,  which  contained  no  provision  for  the  sup- 
port of  religion,  was  satisfactory  to  the  Ohio  Company,  but  when 
the  opportunity  came  to  make  a  more  favorable  contract  with 
Congress,  the  directors  of  the  company  secured  the  grant  of,  not 
only  section  sixteen  in  each  township  for  schools,  but  also  the 
grant  of  every  section  twenty-nine  for  religion  and  two  whole 
townships  for  a  university.  The  significance  of  this  contract  of 
the  Ohio  Company  with  the  Board  of  Treasury  will  be  treated  at 
length  in  the  sixth  chapter. 

From  the  foregoing  brief  review  it  may  be  seen  that  the  idea  of 
forming  states  in  the  unoccupied  federal  territory  and  the  policy 
of  making  federal  land  grants  for  education  had  become  es- 
tablished principles  by  1787.  These  principles  were  given  the 
force  of  law  in  the  governmental  ordinance  of  1784  and  in  the  land 
ordinance  of  1785.  Both  were  in  effect  in  July,  1787,  when  the 
Ordinance  for  the  Government  of  the  Northwest  Territory  was 
enacted  and  when  the  contract  with  the  Ohio  Company  was 
authorized  by  Congress.  The  next  problem  is  to  show  briefly 
what  forces  were  at  work  to  produce  this  new  ordinance  for  the 
government  of  the  Northwest  and  how  that  ordinance  was  related 
to  the  policy  of  granting  lands  for  the  support  of  education.* 

31  Cutler:  I,  p.  181. 


CHAPTER  V 

THE  EDUCATIONAL  SIGNIFICANCE  OF  THE 
ORDINANCE  OF   1787 

The  work  of  revising  the  Ordinance  of  1784,  which  was  for  the 
government  of  the  western  territory,  began  in  March  of  1785 
when  Rufus  King  moved  to  commit  a  proposition  to  prohibit 
slavery  in  the  states  that  were  to  be  formed  under  the  Ordinance 
of  1784.^  This  motion  carried  and  the  proposition  was  thus  com- 
mitted to  the  Committee  of  the  Whole  House.  Here  the  proposi- 
tion rested,  never  to  be  called  up  again  in  Congress. 

The  following  year,  1786,  Congress  again  took  up  the  question 
of  enacting  a  new  ordinance  for  the  government  of  the  western 
territory.  Monroe  wrote  to  Jefferson,  May  11,  1786,  as  follows: 
"In  my  last  I  mentioned  to  you  that  the  propriety  of  the  acts  of 
Congress  founded  on  the  condition  of  the  acts  of  cession  from  the 
states,  fixing  the  limits  of  the  states  westward,  was  questioned. 
A  proposition,  or  rather  a  report,  is  before  Congress,  recommend- 
ing it  to  Virginia  and  Massachusetts  to  revise  their  acts  as  to  that 
condition,  so  as  to  leave  it  to  the  United  States  to  make  what 
division  of  the  same  future  circumstances  may  make  necessary, 
subject  to  this  provision:  'that  the  said  territory  be  divided  into 
not  less  than  two  and  not  more  than  five  states.'  The  plan  of  a 
temporary  government,  to  be  instituted  by  Congress  and  pre- 
served over  such  district  until  they  shall  be  admitted  into  Con- 
gress, is  also  reported." 2  Monroe  was  chairman  of  the  com- 
mittee which  made  the  report  on  the  form  of  government.  The 
other  members  of  the  committee  were  Johnson,  of  Connecticut, 
King,  of  Massachusetts,  and  Kean  and  Pinckney,  of  South  Caro- 
lina.^   The  report  of  this  committee  was  made  May  10,  1786. 


1  Force:  "The  Ordinance  of  1787  and  Its  History,"  in  St.  Clair  Papers,  II, 
pp.  605  ff.,  and  in  Cutler:  II,  Append.  D.,  pp.  410  ff.  See  also  Pickering:  I,  pp. 
512-13. 

*  Bancroft:  I,  pp.  502-03.  Monroe  was  the  leader  in  the  movement  to  reduce 
the  number  of  states  to  be  formed  in  the  federal  territory.  See  Barrett:  pp. 
33  ff. 

3  Bancroft:  II,  p.  100;  5/.  Clair  Papers,  II,  p.  607;  Cutler:  II,  Append.  D.,  p. 
410. 

38 


The  Edticational  Significance  of  the  Ordinance  of  i/8^       39 

The  plan  was  to  institute  a  system  of  colonial  government  similar 
to  that  which  had  prevailed  in  America  under  British  rule,  with 
the  addition  of  the  provision  "that,  when  such  districts  shall 
contain  the  number  of  the  least  numerous  of  the  *  thirteen  original 
states  for  the  time  being,'  they  shall  be  admitted  into  the  con- 
federacy."'* 

No  final  action  was  taken  on  this  report  by  Congress.  Mem- 
bers of  the  committee  failed  to  return  to  Congress,  so  a  new 
committee,  composed  of  Johnson,  of  Connecticut;  Pinckney,  of 
South  Carolina;  Smith,  of  New  York;  Dane,  of  Massachusetts; 
Henry,  of  Maryland ;  was  appointed  to  propose  a  plan  of  govern- 
ment for  the  federal  territory .^  It  should  be  noted  that  none  of 
the  men  who  had  been  the  leaders  in  dealing  with  the  problem  of 
forming  a  government  in  the  federal  territory  was  a  member  of 
this  committee.  The  majority  of  the  committee  were  from  the 
North,  and  no  Virginian  was  a  member.  On  April  26,  1787,  this 
committee  reported  an  ordinance  for  the  government  of  the 
Western  Territory.  It  was  read  the  second  time,  debated,  and 
amended,  on  May  9.  The  following  day  was  set  for  the  final 
reading.*  On  the  tenth  of  May,  1787,  the  final  reading  of  this 
ordinance  was  postponed.  This  ordinance  provided  a  detailed 
plan  of  government  for  the  Western  Territory.  It  is  remarkable 
for  what  it  did  not  contain.  It  contained  no  anti-slavery  provi- 
sion; it  was  silent  on  religious  liberty,  rights  of  conscience,  the 
promotion  of  morality  and  education ;  it  contained  no  articles  of 
compact. 

On  the  other  hand  it  gave  the  governor,  appointed  by  Congress, 
power  to  prorogue  and  dissolve  the  General  Assembly  at  his  dis- 
cretion ;  the  inhabitants  were  subject  to  taxation  to  pay  the  federal 
debts  and  to  maintain  the  federal  government.  The  provision 
that  a  new  state  should  be  admitted  to  the  union  whenever  it 
should  "have  free  inhabitants  as  many  as  are  equal  in  number 
to  the  one-thirteenth  part  of  the  citizens  of  the  original  states,  to 
be  computed  from  the  last  enumeration"  made  it  increasingly 

*  Bancroft:  I,  p.  502,  Monroe's  letter  to  Jefferson,  May  11,  1786.  This  letter 
outlined  the  plan  of  government  proposed. 

^  Force:  "The  Ordinance  of  1787,"  in  St.  Clair  Papers,  II,  p.  607,  and  in 
Cutler:  II,  p.  412. 

^  This  ordinance  is  printed  in  full  in  Force's  History  of  the  Ordinance  of  178/, 
in  the  St.  Clair  Papers,  II,  and  in  Cutler,  II,  also  in  Western  Law  Journal,  V, 
pp.  529  ff.;  in  Winsor:  Narrative  and  Crit.  Hist,  of  Amer.,  VII,  p.  537;  in  Sato: 
Land  Question,  pp.  92  ff.;  in  Donaldson:  Public  Domain,  pp.  150  ff. 


40    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

difficult  for  a  new  state  to  gain  admission  to  the  union  J  This 
provision  was  evidently  born  of  the  New  England  fear  and  jeal- 
ousy of  the  potential  power  of  large  western  states  that  were  to  be 
forrned.  This  proposed  ordinance  seems  to  have  suffered  greatly 
for  the  lack  of  the  influence  of  the  great  leaders  who  had  been  ac- 
tive in  dealing  with  the  western  question.  It  scarcely  seems  pos- 
sible that  such  a  narrow  and  inadequate  measure  could  ever  have 
become  law.  It  was  indeed  fortunate  that  the  motion  to  postpone 
prevailed  on  the  tenth  of  May,  1787. 

The  ordinance  for  the  government  of  the  Western  Territory  was 
not  revived  until  July  9,  1787.  On  that  day  it  was  referred  to  a 
new  committee,  Carrington  and  R.  H.  Lee,  of  Virginia;  Dane,  of 
Massachusetts;  Kean,  of  South  Carolina;  and  Smith,  of  New 
York.  The  majority  of  this  committee  were  from  the  South  and 
Carrington  was  chairman.  This  committee  framed  the  Ordinance 
of  1787,  which  became  law  on  July  13,  of  that  year.^  In  brief  out- 
line the  important  provisions  of  this  ordinance  were  as  follows: 
(i)  estates  of  those  dying  intestate  should  be  distributed  equally 
among  the  children  of  the  deceased,  and  where  there  were  no  chil- 
dren, equally  among  the  next  of  kin;  (2)  the  governor  should  be 
appointed  by  Congress  for  a  term  of  three  years ;  (3)  the  secretary 
should  be  appointed  by  Congress  for  a  term  of  four  years;  (4) 
there  should  be  a  court  of  three  judges,  appointed  to  serve  during 
good  behavior ;  (5)  the  law-making  power  should  be  vested  in  the 
governor  and  the  judges,  subject  to  Congressional  veto,  until  the 
organization  of  the  General  Assembly,  which  should  thereupon 
assume  the  law-making  power;  (6)  a  General  Assembly,  com- 
posed of  the  governor,  legislative  council,  and  a  House  of  Repre- 
sentatives, should  be  formed  as  soon  as  there  were  five  thousand 


'  The  text  of  the  ordinance  is  not  clear  on  this  provision.  If  the  clause  "to 
be  computed  from  the  last  enumeration  "  meant  the  last  enumeration  before  the 
enactment  of  the  ordinance,  then  the  population  requirement  for  admission  was 
definitely  fixed  and  not  unduly  difficult.  If  this  clause  meant  the  last  enumera- 
tion before  the  admission  of  any  state,  the  requirement  became  increasingly 
difficult.  Bancroft  accepted  this  second  interpretation  and  showed  that  Ohio 
could  not  have  been  admitted  until  after  1820,  Indiana  after  1850,  Illinois  after 
i860,  Michigan  after  1880,  and  Wisconsin  probably  never.  See  Bancroft: 
II,  p.  104.  Force  and  his  followers  included  this  provision  in  the  ordinance  as 
it  went  to  final  reading.  Bancroft  said  it  was  stricken  out  by  amendment.  See 
Bancroft:  II,  p.  105. 

^  The  text  of  the  ordinance  may  be  found  in  U.  S.  Statutes  at  Large,  I,  pp. 
51-53;  Chase:  Statutes  of  Ohio  and  Northwest  Territory,  I,  pp.  66-69;  Donald- 
son: Public  Domain,  pp.  153-56;  Force:  History  of  the  Ordinance  of  1787,  in  St, 
Clair  Papers,  II,  pp.  612-18;  Cutler:  II,  pp.  419-27;  Barrett:  pp.  81-89. 


The  Educational  Significance  of  the  Ordinance  of  I'/Sy      41 

free  males  of  age  within  the  district;  (7)  there  should  be  a  repre- 
sentative, elected  for  two  years,  in  the  House  for  each  five  hun- 
dred free  males ;  (8)  the  legislative  council  should  consist  of  five 
members,  whose  term  of  office  was  five  years,  who  should  be  ap- 
pointed by  Congress  from  among  ten  persons  nominated  by  the 
House  of  Representatives ;  (9)  high  property  and  residence  quali- 
fications for  voters  and  office  holders;  (10)  the  articles  of  compact 
which  were :  {a)  a  guarantee  of  religious  liberty ;  (6)  a  guarantee  of 
the  benefits  of  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus,  trial  by  jury,  common  law 
rights,  property  rights,  and  the  non-impairment  of  private  con- 
tracts; (c)  religion,  morality  and  knowledge  being  necessary  to 
good  government  and  the  happiness  of  mankind,  schools  and  the 
means  of  education  shall  forever  be  encouraged,  and  a  guarantee 
of  good  faith  towards  the  Indians;  {d)  the  territory  should  forever 
remain  a  part  of  the  United  States,  the  inhabitants  pay  their  just 
part  of  the  expenses  of  the  federal  government  with  taxes  levied  by 
the  General  Assemblies  or  State  Legislatures  within  the  territory, 
the  navigable  waters  should  remain  free;  {e)  there  should  be  not 
less  than  three  nor  more  than  five  states  formed  within  the  terri- 
tory, and  a  state  should  be  admitted  into  the  union  on  an  equality 
with  the  original  states  as  soon  as  it  should  contain  sixty  thousand 
free  inhabitants ;  (/)  the  prohibition  of  slavery  with  the  provision 
for  the  return  of  fugitive  slaves;  (11)  the  repeal  of  the  Ordinance 
of  April  23,  1784. 

The  Ordinance  of  1787  was  much  more  comprehensive  and 
thoroughgoing  than  any  ordinance  of  government  which  had 
preceded  it.  It  contained  certain  fundamental  principles  that 
have  made  it  justly  celebrated  as  an  essential  part  of  the  broad 
and  sure  foundation  on  which  has  been  erected  the  American  na- 
tion. But  as  far  as  the  greater  part  of  this  ordinance  is  concerned, 
it  had  no  connection  with  the  development  of  the  policy  of  land 
grants  for  education,  except  in  that  it  established  a  form  of  terri- 
torial government  which  led  to  the  rapid  settlement  of  the  un- 
occupied lands  and  thereby  made  effective  and  useful  the  land 
grants  for  public  education.  The  third  of  the  Articles  of  Com- 
pact contained  the  only  specific  reference  to  education,  and  that 
was  couched  in  most  general  terms:  "Religion,  morality,  and 
knowledge,  being  necessary  to  good  government  and  the  happi- 
ness of  mankind ;  schools  and  the  means  of  education  shall  forever 
be  encouraged." 


42    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

There  has  been  so  much  said  and  written  in  a  spirit  of  contro- 
versy with  reference  to  the  influences  which  produced  the  Ordi- 
nance of  1787,  that  it  is  somewhat  difficult  to  determine,  with  any 
great  degree  of  accuracy,  its  true  significance.  The  provision  in 
the  ordinance  concerning  the  encouragement  of  education  cannot 
be  correctly  understood  except  as  it  is  considered  in  its  relation  to 
other  fundamental  principles  in  the  ordinance.  A  brief  analysis 
of  some  of  the  evidence  as  regards  the  influences  which  produced 
the  ordinance  will  assist  in  its  proper  interpretation  from  the  view- 
point of  education. 

Among  the  earliest  claimants  of  special  credit  in  connection 
with  the  Ordinance  of  1787  was  Nathan  Dane,  of  Massachusetts. 
Three  days  after  the  ordinance  became  law  Dane  said  in  a  letter 
to  Rufus  King:  "When  I  drew  the  ordinance  (which  passed,  a 
few  words  excepted  as  I  originally  formed  it)  I  had  no  idea  the 
states  would  agree  to  the  sixth  article,  prohibiting  slavery,  as  only 
Massachusetts,  of  the  eastern  states,  was  present,  and  therefore 
omitted  it  in  the  draft;  but,  finding  the  house  favorably  disposed 
on  this  subject,  after  we  had  completed  the  other  parts  I  moved 
the  article,  which  was  agreed  to  without  opposition.  We  are  in  a 
fair  way  to  fix  the  term.s  of  our  Ohio  sale,  etc."^     It  would  appear 

9  Bancroft'  II,  pp.  430-31.  A  letter  from  Nathan  Dane  to  Rufus  King, 
New  York,  16  July,  1787.  As  this  letter  of  Dane's  throws  much  light  on  the 
passage  of  the  ordinance  it  is  herewith  given  as  printed  in  Bancroft.  "Dear 
Sir:  I  am  obliged  to  you  for  yours  of  the  eleventh  instant.  With  pleasure  I 
communicate  to  you  what  we  are  doing  in  Congress — not  so  much  from  a  con- 
sciousness that  what  we  do  is  well  done  as  from  a  desire  that  you  may  be  ac- 
quainted with  our  proceedings.  We  have  been  much  engaged  in  business  for 
ten  or  twelve  days  past,  for  a  part  of  which  we  have  had  eight  states.  There 
appears  to  be  a  disposition  to  do  business,  and  the  arrival  of  R.  H.  Lee  is  of  con- 
siderable importance.  I  think  his  character  serves,  at  least  in  some  degree,  to 
check  the  public  habits  and  lax  mode  of  thinking  of  some  of  his  countrymen. 
We  have  been  employed  about  several  objects,  the  principal  of  which  have  been 
the  government  enclosed  and  the  Ohio  purchase;  the  former,  you  will  see,  is 
completed,  and  the  latter  will  probably  be  completed  tomorrow.  We  tried 
one  day  to  patch  up  M's  p  system  of  W.  government;  started  new  ideas  and 
committed  the  whole  to  Carrington,  Dane,  R.  H.  Lee,  Smith,  and  Kean.  We 
met  several  times,  and  at  last  agreed  on  some  principles;  at  least  Lee, 
Smith,  and  myself.  We  found  ourselves  rather  pressed.  The  Ohio  Company 
appeared  to  purchase  a  large  tract  of  federal  lands — about  six  or  seven 
millions  of  acres — and  we  wanted  to  abolish  the  old  system  and  get  a  better 
one  for  the  government  of  the  country,  and  we  finally  found  it  necessary  to 
adopt  the  best  system  we  could  get.  All  agreed  to  the  enclosed  plan  except  A. 
Yates.  He  appeared  in  this  case,  as  in  most  others,  not  to  understand  the  sub- 
ject at  all.  I  think  the  number  of  free  inhabitants — 60,000 — which  are  requi- 
site for  the  admission  of  a  new  state  into  the  confederacy  is  too  small;  but,  hav- 
ing divided  the  whole  territory  into  three  states  this  number  appears  to  me  to 
be  less  important.  Each  state,  in  the  common  course  of  things,  must  become 
important  soon  after  it  shall  have  that  number  of  inhabitants.     The  eastern 


The  Educational  Significance  of  the  Ordinance  of  lySy       43 

from  this  letter  that  Dane  "admitted"  that  he  was  largely  re- 
sponsible for  the  Ordinance  of  1787.  Some  writers  have  been  led 
to  believe  that  Dane  claimed  to  be  the  author  of  the  ordinance.^*^ 
Dane  later  stated  that  he  never  "claimed  originality,  except  in 
regard  to  the  clause  against  impairing  contracts,  and  perhaps  the 
Indian  article,  part  of  the  third  article,  including  also,  religion, 
morality,  knowledge,  schools,  etc."  ^^  Dane  was  a  leading  member 
of  the  committee  which  framed  the  ordinance,  presented  in  Con- 
gress April  26,  1787,  which  on  May  9,  was  amended  and  ordered  to 
final  reading.  As  has  been  pointed  out  that  ordinance  con- 
tained few  of  the  important  and  far-reaching  provisions  of  the 
Ordinance  of  1787.  In  view  of  this  fact  and  other  evidence  which 
will  be  presented  in  other  connections,  it  is  difficult  to  conclude 
that  Dane's  influence  on  the  Ordinance  of  1787  was  of  any  great 
consequence. 

Force,  in  his  history  of  the  Ordinance  of  1787,  gave  Carrington 

state  of  the  three  will  probably  be  the  first  and  more  important  than  the  rest, 
and  will  no  doubt  be  settled  chiefly  by  eastern  people;  and  there  is,  I  think,  full 
an  equal  chance  of  its  adopting  eastern  politics.  When  I  drew  the  ordinance 
(which  passed,  a  few  words  excepted,  as  I  originally  formed  it),  I  had  no  idea 
the  states  would  agree  to  the  sixth  article,  prohibiting  slavery,  as  only  Massa- 
chusetts, of  the  eastern  states,  was  present,  and  therefore  omitted  it  in  the 
draft;  but  finding  the  house  favorably  disposed  on  this  subject,  after  we  had 
completed  the  other  parts  I  moved  the  article,  which  was  agreed  to  without  op- 
position. We  are  in  a  fair  way  to  fix  the  terms  of  our  Ohio  sale,  etc.  We  have 
been  upon  it  three  days  steadily.  The  magnitude  of  the  purchase  makes  us 
very  cautious  about  the  terms  of  it,  and  the  security  necessary  to  ensure  the 
performance  of  it. 

"(The  preceding  extract  was  communicated  to  the  New  York  Tribune,  31 
Jan.,  1855,  by  Charles  King.  Its  authenticity  is  vouched  for  by  Charles  R. 
King,  the  present  custodian  of  the  original.) " 

1°  Poole:  The  Ordinance  of  1787.  See  also  North  American  Review,  CXXII, 
pp.  259-60.  Poole  said  that  the  Ordinance  of  1787  was  an  essential  part  of  the 
plan  of  the  Ohio  Company.  The  fact  that  Dr.  Cutler  was  in  conference  three 
times  within  twenty-four  hours  with  the  committee  which  reported  the  ordi- 
nance led  Poole  to  believe  that  Cutler  was  responsible  for  the  most  important 
provisions  of  the  ordinance,  and  that  he  went  to  New  York  with  the  outline  of  a 
scheme  of  government  which  had  been  approved  by  the  Ohio  Company. 
Poole  discredited  Dane's  claims  because  he  had  been  on  the  committee  which 
reported  the  earlier  ordinance  that  lacked  the  most  important  provisions  of  the 
ordinance  as  finally  enacted.  Dane's  interest  in  the  development  of  Maine 
also  convinced  Poole  that  he  was  not  active  in  framing  the  ordinance  for  the 
Northwest  Territory.  The  mere  fact  that  the  ordinance  was  satisfactory  to 
Dr.  Cutler  and  the  Ohio  Company  was  strong  evidence  to  Poole  that  they  were 
responsible  for  it.  He  did  not  undertake  to  explain  why  Congress  passed  the 
ordinance  without  a  state  dissenting. 

1^  Barrett:  p.  65  n.  2,  citing  a  letter  of  Dane's  to  Webster  from  Mass.  Hist. 
Soc.  Proc.  1867-69,  p.  479.  Barrett  says  that  Dane  did  not  mean  to  claim 
originality  for  the  provisions  concerning  religion,  morality,  knowledge  and 
schools. 


44    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

credit  for  much  of  the  ordinance.^^  He  said:  "The  reader,  on 
comparing  this^^  with  the  plans  previously  reported  by  Mr.  Jef- 
ferson and  Mr.  Johnson,  will  see  that  most  of  the  principles  *on 
which  its  wisdom  and  fame  rest'  were  first  presented  by  Mr. 
Carrington."^^  There  is  little  reason  to  doubt  that  Carrington's 
influence  on  the  ordinance  was  great.  Certainly  Dr.  Cutler  con- 
sidered him  of  much  greater  consequence  than  Dane.  But  it  is 
futile  to  try  to  show  that  Carrington  or  Dane  or  any  other  one 
man  was  the  author  of  the  Ordinance  of  1787,  or  of  any  great  part 
of  it.  There  is  scarcely  a  new  idea  in  the  ordinance.  Earlier 
ordinances,  colonial  charters,  state  constitutions,  and  even  the 
Magna  Charta  itself,  furnished  precedents  from  which  could  be 
gathered  all  of  the  fundamental  principles  contained  in  it.  The 
attempts  to  attribute  authorship  to  particular  individuals  have 
frequently  been  born  either  of  sectional  pride  and  prejudice  or  of 
the  spirit  of  controversy.  It  is  generally  agreed  to-day  that  the 
ordinance  was  the  culmination  of  a  process  of  development.  Suf- 
ficient evidence  has  been  submitted  to  show  that  this  is  unques- 
tionably true  as  regards  the  principles  of  establishing  in  the  federal 
territory  independent  states,  to  be  admitted  into  the  union  on  an 
equality  with  the  original  states  and  of  encouraging  religion  and 
education.  In  the  same  manner  it  could  be  shown  that  the  other 
fundamental  principles  of  the  ordinance  had  gradually  developed, ^^ 
but  such  an  undertaking  is  not  within  the  scope  of  this  work. 

There  is  considerable  evidence  to  show  that  the  final  form 
which  was  given  to  the  Ordinance  of  1787  was  due  to  influence  and 
pressure  which  was  brought  to  bear  upon  Congress  by  the 
Ohio  Company.     The  evidence  is  about  as  follows: 

The  Army  Plan  of  1783  had  contained  the  principles  of  estab- 
lishing a  state,  encouragement  of  education,  and  total  exclusion 
of  slavery.  Putnam's  letter  in  connection  with  the  Ofhcers' 
Petition  of  1783  also  suggested  the  support  of  education,  while 
the  petition  itself  contained  the  idea  of  establishing  a  new  state. 


12  It  would  be  interesting  to  know  if  Dane  included  Carrington  among  those 
Virginians,  whose  "public  habits  and  lax  mode  of  thinking"  would  be  checked 
by  the  presence  of  R.  H.  Lee. 

"  The  original  ordinance  with  the  amendments  made  July  12,  1787. 

"  Force:  "  The  Ordinance  of  1787,  and  Its  History,"  in  St.  Clair  Papers  II,  p. 
412.     Also  in  Cutler:  II,  p.  419. 

Jefferson,  Grayson,  King  and  Lee  have  also  been  credited  with  the  author- 
ship of  all  or  part  of  the  ordinance.     See  Dunn:  Indiana,  pp.  177  ff. 

^^  For  a  full  treatment  of  this  point  see  Barrett:  Chaps.  9  and  10. 


The  Educational  Significance  of  the  Ordinance  of  1787       45 

Many  of  the  men  who  were  responsible  for  the  Army  Plan  and  who 
signed  the  Officers'  Petition  became  members  of  the  Ohio  Com- 
pany. 

The  grandchildren  of  Dr.  Cutler,  in  their  Life  of  Rev.  Manasseh 
Cutler  J  have  compiled  what  they  termed  "traditional  testi- 
mony" to  show  Dr.  Cutler's  influence  on  the  Ordinance  of  1787. 
There  is  no  way  in  which  to  corroborate  this  "traditional  testi- 
mony" directly.  It  is  indirectly  supported  by  Cutler's  diary  and 
other  evidence.     It  is  here  given  for  what  it  is  worth. 

"Dr.  Joseph  Torrey,  of  Salem,  Mass.,  wrote  to  Judge  Ephraim 
Cutler,  Jan.  30,  1847,  as  follows:  'At  a  recent  professional  call  at 
Hamilton  (Dr.  Cutler's  home)  Brother  Temple  produced  large 
files  of  Ohio  documents,  but  I  had  time  only  for  a  hasty  examina- 
tion. I  saw  among  these  documents  the  Ordinance  of  1787  on  a 
printed  sheet.  On  its  margin  was  written  that  Mr.  Dane  re- 
quested Dr.  Cutler  to  suggest  such  provisions  as  he  deemed  ad- 
visable, and  that  at  Dr.  Cutler's  instance  was  inserted  what  re- 
lates to  religion,  education,  and  slavery.  These  facts  have  long 
been  known  to  me  as  household  words.' "  ^^ 

It  is  rather  curious  that  these  are  the  provisions  with  which 
Dane  connected  his  own  name.  On  one  occasion  Dane  intimated 
that  he  took  the  provision  concerning  morality  and  education  from 
the  laws  of  Massachusetts.^^  In  Dr.  Cutler's  diary  is  recorded 
the  fact  that  the  ordinance  was  submitted  to  him  for  amendment 
and  that,  as  a  result  of  his  amendments,  it  was  "  in  a  degree  new- 
modeled." 

The  second  bit  of  "traditional  testimony"  is  as  follows: 

"Hon.  Daniel  Webster  solicited  and  obtained  the  examination 
of  Dr.  Cutler's  journal.  Subsequently,  Temple  Cutler  wrote 
to  his  brother  Ephraim:  'Webster  is  now  convinced  that  the 
man  whose  foresight  suggested  some  of  these  articles  was  our 
Father.'"  i« 

In  1830,  during  the  debate  on  the  Foote  Resolution  in  the 
United  States  Senate,  Webster  delivered  an  eloquent  eulogy  of 
Dane  because  of  his  great  service  rendered  in  connection  with  the 
Ordinance  of  1787.  In  view  of  this  fact  it  would  be  interesting  to 
know  just  when  Webster  examined  Dr.  Cutler's  journal.     The 


16  Cutler:  I,  p.  343. 
1^  King:  Ohio,  p.  407. 
18  Cutler:  I,  p.  343. 


46    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

quotation  given  above  seems  to  indicate  that  before  the  examina- 
tion Webster  had  believed  that  some  one  other  than  Dr.  Cutler 
deserved  the  credit  for  the  ordinance,  but  after  reading  the  jour- 
nal, his  convictions  were  completely  altered.  If  this  interpreta- 
tion is  correct,  Webster  unquestionably  saw  Cutler's  journal  after 
he  had  eulogized  Dane. 

The  last  of  the  "traditional  testimony"  is  as  follows: 
"  Ephraim  Cutler  has  left  the  following  written  statement  of  his 
recollections :  '  I  visited  my  Father  at  Washington  during  the  last 
session  he  attended  Congress  (1804-5).  .  .  .  We  were  in 
conversation  relative  to  the  political  concerns  of  Ohio,  the  ruling 
parties,  and  the  effect  of  the  (Ohio)  Constitution  in  the  promotion 
of  the  general  interests,  when  he  observed  that  he  was  informed 
that  I  had  prepared  that  portion  of  the  Ohio  Constitution  which 
contained  the  part  of  the  Ordinance  of  1787,  which  prohibited 
slavery.  He  wished  to  know  if  it  was  a  fact.  On  my  assuring 
him  that  it  was,  he  observed  that  he  thought  it  a  singular  coinci- 
dence, as  he  himself  had  prepared  that  part  of  the  ordinance  while 
he  was  in  New  York  negotiating  the  purchase  of  the  land  for  the 
Ohio  Company,  I  had  not  then  seen  the  Journal  he  kept  while  he 
was  in  New  York  at  that  time.'  In  another  written  memoranda 
Judge  Cutler  refers  to  the  conversation  with  his  father,  and  states 
as  the  reason  why  this  prohibition  of  slavery,  as  well  as  the  rec- 
ognition of  religion,  morality,  and  knowledge,  as  foundations  of 
civil  government,  were  incorporated  into  the  ordinance,  and  provi- 
sion made  in  the  land  purchase  for  their  support,  arose  from  the 
fact  that  'he  was  acting  for  associates,  friends,  and  neighbors, 
who  would  not  embark  in  the  enterprise,  unless  these  principles 
were  unalterably  fixed.' "^* 

Of  course  the  original  purpose  of  this  "traditional  testimony" 
was  to  support  the.  claim  that  Dr.  Cutler  was  the  author  of  the 
provisions  of  the  ordinance  enumerated  by  Ephraim  Cutler. 
Such  a  consideration  is  immaterial  in  this  work.  The  chief  con- 
cern here  is  to  find  the  relationship  which  existed  between  the 
Ordinance  of  1787  and  land  grants  for  education.  Ephraim  Cut- 
ler recorded  that  Dr.  Cutler  inserted  certain  provisions  in  the 
ordinance,  including  the  provision  for  the  encouragement  of 
schools  and  means  of  education,  because  he  was  acting  for  as- 
sociates, friends,  and  neighbors,  who  would  not  embark  in  the 

19  Cutler:  I,  pp.  343-44- 


The  Educational  Significance  of  the  Ordinance  of  lySy       47 

enterprise,  unless  these  principles  were  unalterably  fixed.  Yet 
the  Ohio  Company  was  organized  to  purchase  lands  under  the 
terms  of  the  Ordinance  of  1785  or  on  any  other  terms  "not  less 
advantageous  to  the  company  "^'^  at  the  time  when  the  Ordinance 
of  1784  for  the  establishment  of  a  government  in  the  Western 
Territory  was  in  effect.  At  that  time  slavery  was  not  prohibited 
in  the  Ohio  country  and  no  provision  was  made  for  the  support  of 
religion.  It  therefore  appears  that  Dr.  Cutler's  associates  in  the 
Ohio  Company,  for  whom  he  was  acting,  had  determined  not  to 
''embark  in  the  enterprise,  unless  these  principles  were  unalter- 
ably fixed,"  subsequent  to  the  organization  of  the  Ohio  Company. 
This  inconsistency  may  be  more  apparent  than  real.  It  is  pos- 
sible that  the  sentiment  in  the  Ohio  Company  in  favor  of  these  pro- 
visions might  have  grown  to  such  proportions  between  March  i, 
1786,  and  July,  1787,  that  they  were  really  indispensable  to  the 
success  of  the  company.  It  certainly  is  not  improbable  that  Dr. 
Cutler,  who  was  familiar  with  the  strong  convictions  of  his  as- 
sociates as  regards  these  principles,  honestly  believed  them  to  be 
indispensable  when  the  new  ordinance  for  the  government  of  the 
Northwest  was  pending  in  July,  1787.  Without  doubt  he  exerted 
his  influence  as  representative  of  the  Ohio  Company  to  have  these 
incorporated  into  the  Ordinance  of  1787.  It  is  a  matter  of  record 
that  the  contract  for  the  purchase  of  lands  by  the  Ohio  Company 
contained  the  most  liberal  grants  for  education  and  religion  that 
had  ever  been  made.  This  was  done,  notwithstanding  the  fact 
that  such  a  contract  was  contrary  to  the  Land  Ordinance  of  1785, 
which  was  the  law  at  the  time. 

That  there  was  a  vital  connection  between  the  Ordinance  of 
1787  and  the  contract  with  the  Ohio  Company  is  not  only  strongly 
suggested  by  foregoing  evidence  from  the  Cutler  records,  but  is 
practically  proved  by  other  evidence.  Richard  Henry  Lee  wrote 
Washington,  under  date  of  July  15,  1787,  as  follows:  "I  have  the 
honor  to  enclose  to  you  an  ordinance  that  we  have  just  passed  in 
Congress,  for  establishing  a  temporary  government  beyond  the 
Ohio,  as  a  measure  preparatory  to  the  sale  of  lands.  It  seemed 
necessary  for  the  security  of  property  among  uninformed  and 
perhaps  licentious  people,  as  the  greater  part  of  those  who  go 
there  are,  that  a  strong-toned  government  should  exist  and  the 


Part  of  Art.  2  of  the  Art.  of  Agreement  of  the  Ohio  Co.     Cutler:  I,  p.  181, 


48    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

rights  of  property  be  clearly  defined." '^^  Lee's  estimate  of  the 
worth  of  the  New  Englander  as  a  pioneer  was  slightly  lower  than 
Cutler's  rating  of  settlers  from  the  southern  states.^^  It  is  not 
unlikely  that  some  members  of  Congress  would  have  disagreed 
with  Lee  on  this  point,  but  in  so  far  as  his  statement  that  the 
Ordinance  of  1787  was  enacted  "as  a  measure  preparatory  to  the 
sale  of  lands"  is  concerned,  it  probably  expressed  the  general  senti- 
ment of  Congress.  Lee  was  a  warm  friend  of  Dr.  Cutler's,  an  in- 
fluential member  of  the  committee  which  framed  the  Ordinance  of 
1787,  and  a  strong  supporter  in  Congress  of  the  Ohio  Company's 
proposition  to  purchase  land.  No  man  was  in  a  better  position  to 
know  all  the  facts.  The  only  sale  of  lands  of  any  consequence  that 
was  under  consideration  by  Congress  at  the  time  was  the  pro- 
posed sale  to  the  Ohio  Company.  Lee's  assertion  that  the  ordi- 
nance was  a  preparatory  measure  to  the  sale  of  lands  certainly  re- 
ferred to  the  Ohio  Company's  proposition.  His  statement  offers 
a  satisfactory  explanation  for  the  speed  with  which  the  ordinance 
was  drafted  and  brought  to  a  final  vote.^^ 

In  addition  to  Lee's  letter  there  is  Dane's  letter  to  King,  under 
date  of  July  16,  1787,^^  which  further  indicates  that  the  enactment 
of  the  Ordinance  of  1787  was  largely  due  to  the  pressure  brought 
to  bear  by  the  proposed  purchase  of  lands  by  the  Ohio  Company. 
The  following  extracts  from  Dane's  letter  clearly  show  this:  "We 
have  been  employed  about  several  objects — the  principal  ones  of 
which  have  been  the  Governments^  enclosed,  and  the  Ohio  Pur- 
chase. The  former  you  will  see  is  completed,  and  the  latter  will 
probably  be  completed  to-morrow.  We  tried  one  day  to  patch 
up  M.'s  p  system  of  W.  government.  Started  new  ideas,  and 
committed  the  whole  to  Carrington,  Dane,  R.  H.  Lee,  Smith,  and 
Kean.  We  met  several  times,  and  at  last  agreed  on  some  princi- 
ples, at  least  Lee,  Smith,  and  myself.  We  found  ourselves  rather 
pressed  .2^     The  Ohio  Company  appeared  to  purchase  a  large  tract 

21  Cutler:  I,  p.  367. 

22  In  a  letter  to  Dane,  Mar.  16,  1787,  Cutler  said:  "Settlers  from  the  northern 
states,  in  which  this  company  is  made  up,  are  undoubtedly  preferable  to  those 
from  the  southern  states.  They  will  be  men  of  more  robust  constitutions,  in- 
ured to  labor,  and  free  from  habits  of  idleness."     Cutler:  I,  p.  194. 

2'  The  ordinance  was  referred  to  the  committee  on  July  9,  was  then  drafted, 
reported,  debated,  amended,  and  pushed  to  final  enactment  on  July  13,  1787. 

2<  The  letter  is  printed  on  page  42,  footnote  9. 

28  The  Ordinance  of  1787. 

26  In  Cutler:  I,  pp.  371-72  this  letter  is  printed  with  a  semicolon  in  place  of 
the  period.     Other  minor  differences  will  be  found  in  Cutler's  reprint  also.    The 


The  Educational  Significance  of  the  Ordinance  of  lySy       49 

of  federal  lands — about  six  or  seven  millions  of  acres — and  we 
wanted  to  abolish  the  old  system  and  get  a  better  one  for  the 
government  of  the  country,  and  we  finally  found  it  necessary  to 
adopt  the  best  system  we  could  get.  ...  I  had  no  idea  the 
states  would  agree  to  the  sixth  article,  prohibiting  slavery,  as  only 
Massachusetts,  of  the  eastern  states,  was  present, — but,  .  .  . 
after  we  had  completed  the  other  parts  I  moved  the  article,  which 
was  agreed  to  without  opposition.  We  are  in  a  fair  way  to  fix  the 
terms  of  our  Ohio  sale,  etc.  We  have  been  upon  it  three  days 
steadily."  Beyond  question  the  ordinance  for  government  and 
the  sale  of  lands  to  the  Ohio  Company  were  inseparably  as- 
sociated in  Dane's  mind.  The  whole  tone  of  his  letter  is  one  of 
haste  and  work  done  under  pressure.  From  such  an  expression 
as  "we  tried  one  day  to  patch  up  M's  ^^  p  system  of  W.  Govern- 
ment" it  would  seem  that  the  committee  scarcely  realized  the  full 
significance  of  the  work  they  were  doing.  An  ordinance  for  the 
government  of  the  western  territory  had  been  a  serious  problem 
for  years.  Several  committees  had  spent  months  trying  to  solve 
it.  There  was  little  probability  that  a  good  ordinance  could  be 
" patched  up"  In  an  afternoon.  Yet  as  a  matter  of  fact  the  com- 
mittee's work  was  done  in  less  than  five  days.  This  certainly  bears 
out  Dane's  statement  that  the  committee  was  "rather  pressed." 

Dane  was  not  a  master  of  style  and  his  writing  frequently  lacked 
coherence.  But  the  sentence:  "The  Ohio  Company  appeared  to 
purchase  a  large  tract  of  federal  lands — about  six  or  seven  millions 
of  acres — and  we  wanted  to  abolish  the  old  system  and  get  a 
better  one  for  the  government  of  the  country,  and  we  finally  found 
it  necessary  to  adopt  the  best  system  we  could  get"  may  not  be  as 
incoherent  as  it  at  first  seems.  The  appearance  of  the  Ohio  Com- 
pany made  a  new  system  of  government  for  the  Ohio  country 
very  desirable  and  the  urgency  of  the  case  made  it  necessary  to 
propose  the  best  ordinance  that  Congress  could  agree  upon  and 

quotation  given  is  copied  from  Bancroft:  II,  pp.  430-31.  Both  Cutler  and 
Bancroft  cite  the  New  York  Tribune  as  a  source.  The  reason  for  using  Ban- 
croft's text  is  that  it  is  printed  in  the  appendix,  without  comment  or  special 
purpose,  while  the  letter  is  used  in  Cutler's  Life  in  the  chapter  dealing  with  Dr. 
Cutler's  influence  on  the  Ordinance  of  1787,  in  which  the  attempt  is  made  to 
prove  the  close  relationship  between  the  ordinance  and  the  Ohio  Company  con- 
tract. The  text  there  used  is  slightly  more  favorable  for  that  purpose  than 
that  given  by  Bancroft. 

27  Doubtless  referred  to  the  plan  submitted  by  Monroe's  committee  the  year 
before.     Cutler  has:  M.  S.  P.  systems,  etc. 


50    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

enact.  Dane,  himself,  was  not  wholly  satisfied  with  the  ease 
with  which  new  states  could  be  formed  under  the  ordinance,  but 
hoped  the  influence  of  the  Ohio  Company  would  lead  the  first 
state  established  to  adopt  New  England  politics. 

On  many  points  the  testimony  of  Dane  might  well  be  questioned, 
but  where  there  is  so  much  which  corroborates  him,  it  is  not  un- 
reasonable to  accept  his  statements  at  full  value.  Dane  said  the 
sixth  article  of  compact,  which  prohibited  slavery,  was  added,  on 
his  motion,  after  the  rest  of  the  ordinance  had  been  approved  by 
Congress.  There  is  little  or  no  reason  to  believe  that  Dane  was 
the  author  of  this  article,  or  even  that  he  acted  on  his  own  initia- 
tive in  introducing  the  article  as  an  amendment,  nevertheless  the 
context  of  the  ordinance  bears  out  his  statement  that  it  was  not  a 
part  of  the  original  draft.  The  organization  of  territorial  general 
assemblies  and  the  admission  of  new  states  into  the  union  were 
contingent  upon  certain  fixed  numbers  of  free  male  inhabitants. 
These  provisions  clearly  took  into  account  the  possibility  of  slavery 
being  introduced  into  the  Northwest.  The  ordinance  was  thus 
framed  so  that  if  the  sixth  article  failed  of  passage,  slaves  could 
not  be  counted  for  purposes  of  representation.  If  the  article  was 
adopted,  it  could  be  added  without  necessitating  further  amend- 
ment to  the  articles  previously  adopted. 

Dane  was  surprised  that  the  anti-slavery  provision  met  with 
favor  in  Congress,  which  was  controlled  by  the  South  at  the  time. 
There  are  two  factors  which  help  to  explain  this  attitude  of  the 
South.  One  was  the  anxiety  on  the  part  of  the  southern  leaders, 
Carrington,  Grayson  and  Lee,  to  reduce  the  federal  debt  and 
further  the  development  of  the  country  by  making  the  sale  to  the 
Ohio  Company,  which  made  them  disposed  to  prohibit  slavery  in 
the  Northwest,  as  a  special  inducement  to  the  members  of  the 
Ohio  Company.  Carrington  wrote  Madison  on  July  25,  1787,  as 
follows:  "We  are  trying  to  do  something  with  our  western  ter- 
ritory to  make  it  useful  to  the  purposes  for  which  the  United  States 
were  vested  with  it.  You  have  seen  in  the  papers  the  scheme  for 
the  temporary  as  well  as  perpetual  government  of  it.  A  practical 
measure  for  the  sale  of  it,  or  rather  by  means  of  it,  to  redeem  the 
domestic  debt,  remains  still  to  be  agreed  upon,  and  I  fear  the  dif- 
ficulties which  have  always  stood  in  the  way  of  this  great  object 
are  not  yet  to  be  surmounted.  Colonel  Lee  joins  Grayson  and 
myself  with  great  zeal,  but  what  will  be  the  issue  of  our  efforts  I 


The  Educational  Significance  of  the  Ordinance  of  1787       51 

know  not." 2^  After  the  sale  to  the  Ohio  Company  had  been 
authorized  Carrington  wrote  a  letter  to  Monroe,  August  7,  1787, 
in  which,  after  outlining  the  terrns  of  the  sale,  he  said :  "This  I  hold 
a  great  bargain  for  the  U.  S.,  as  the  land  goes  good  and  bad  to- 
gether, and  it  will  be  a  means  of  introducing  into  the  country,  in 
the  first  instance,  a  description  of  men  who  will  fix  the  character 
and  politics  throughout  the  whole  territory,  and  will  probably 
endure  to  the  latest  period  of  time.  This  company  is  formed  of 
the  best  men  in  Connecticut  and  Massachusetts,  and  they  will 
move  out  immediately.  I  am  about  to  join  them  with  a  few 
shares;  what  think  you  of  such  an  adventure? "^^ 

The  next  day,  August  8,  Grayson  wrote  Monroe  a  lengthy  ac- 
count of  the  Ordinance  of  1787  and  of  the  contract  with  the  Ohio 
Company.  A  brief  quotation  from  this  letter  will  disclose  the 
second  factor  that  induced  the  South  to  support  the  anti-slavery 
provision.  Grayson  said:  "The  clause  respecting  slavery  was 
agreed  to  by  the  southern  members  for  the  purpose  of  preventing 
tobacco  and  indigo  from  being  made  on  the  northwest  side  of  the 
Ohio,  as  well  as  for  several  other  political  reasons."  ^°  Here  in- 
deed is  light  on  the  attitude  of  the  South.  Grayson  then  out- 
lined the  terms  of  the  sale  to  the  Ohio  Company  and  pointed  out 
that  the  proposed  settlements  would  greatly  increase  the  value  of 
Virginia's  lands  in  the  West.  He  remarked  that  other  companies 
were  being  formed  and  that  eventually  such  sales  would  probably 
extend  to  the  Mississippi.  Grayson  certainly  looked  upon  the 
Ordinance  of  1787  as  a  means  to  promote  the  sale  of  federal  lands 
and  the  development  of  the  back  country. 

Due  to  the  absence  of  General  St.  Clair,  Grayson  was  the  pre- 
siding officer  in  Congress  when  the  ordinance  was  debated  and 
passed,  Carrington  was  the  chairman  of  the  committee  which 
framed  the  ordinance,  and  Lee  was  an  influential  member  both  of 
the  committee  and  of  Congress.  These  three  outstanding  leaders 
were  in  full  agreement  that  the  main  purpose  of  the  Ordinance  of 
1787  was  to  further  the  sale  of  lands,  particularly  to  the  Ohio  Com- 
pany.    In  fact  the  general  agreement  of  all  the  evidence  thus  far 


28  Bancroft:  II,  p.  436. 

29  Bancroft :  1 1 ,  p.  436-37.  Compare  this  liberal  view  of  Carrington's  towards 
New  Englanders  with  Lee's,  and  also  with  the  expressed  views  of  Dane  and 
Cutler  towards  southerners, 

30  Bancroft:  II,  p.  437.  The  letter  is  printed  in  full.  Many  southern  states- 
men had  consistently  favored  the  prohibition  of  slavery  in  the  Northwest. 


52    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

submitted  shows  clearly  that  the  Ordinance  of  1787  was  enacted 
primarily  as  a  measure  preparatory  to  the  sale  of  western  lands. 
It  is  equally  clear  that  the  provision  for  education  in  the  ordinance 
was  one  of  the  special  inducements  which  encouraged  the  purchase 
of  lands  and  settlement  in  the  Northwest  Territory. 

It  is  neither  possible  nor  necessary  to  prove  that  Dr.  Cutler  or 
his  associates  originated  the  provisions  in  the  ordinance  concern- 
ing property,  inheritance,  future  government,  prohibition  of  slav- 
ery, encouragement  of  religion  and  particularly  of  education. 
These  had  all  been  discussed  both  in  and  out  of  Congress  for  years 
and  many  of  them  had  become  accepted  principles  of  government. 
The  important  fact  is  that  the  ordinance  was  framed  and  passed 
with  the  knowledge  and  approval  of  the  representatives  of  the 
Ohio  Company  and  they  were  unwilling  to  purchase  lands  without 
the  enactment  of  such  a  safe-guarding  ordinance.  Beyond  ques- 
tion the  Ordinance  of  1787  and  the  sale  of  the  lands  by  contract 
were  closely  associated  in  the  minds  of  members  of  Congress. 
With  the  passage  of  the  ordinance  Congress  at  once  took  up  the 
business  of  fixing  the  terms  of  a  contract  with  the  Ohio  Company. 
After  two  weeks  of  maneuvering  in  which  politics  and  a  financial 
deal  with  a  member  of  the  Board  of  Treasury  played  no  small 
part.  Cutler  secured  for  the  company  the  terms  he  had  dictated  to 
Congress. 

The  full  importance  of  the  Ordinance  of  1787  as  an  instrument 
of  government  was  not  appreciated  at  the  time,  either  by  the 
public  or  by  the  members  of  Congress.  It  received  scant  notice 
in  the  leading  papers  of  the  day.  Neither  the  New  York  Packet 
nor  the  New  York  Daily  Advertiser  even  so  much  as  mentioned 
the  ordinance.  It  was  printed  without  a  word  of  comment  in  the 
Pennsylvania  Gazette,  of  Philadelphia,  on  July  25,  1787.^1  Pub- 
lic interest  was  centered  at  that  time  on  the  Constitutional  Con- 
vention then  in  session  at  Philadelphia  and  the  papers  were  giving 
much  space  to  its  proceedings.  The  doings  at  New  York  of  the 
discredited  Continental  Congress  were  of  no  interest.  The  real 
worth  of  the  Ordinance  of  1787  was  not  appreciated  until  after  it 
was  in  actual  operation.  Its  fame  was  greatly  increased  in  the 
heated  debates  in  subsequent  years  of  sectional  strife.    To  the 


'1  These  statements  concerning  contemporary  newspapers  are  based  upon 
the  examination  of  the  files  of  these  papers  for  June,  July,  and  August,  1787, 
in  the  Public  Library  of  New  York  City. 


The  Educational  Significance  of  the  Ordinance  of  1787       53 

men  who  voted  for  the  enactment  of  the  Ordinance  of  1787,  doubt- 
less many  of  its  provisions  were  too  vaguely  general  to  have  much 
meaning.  Yet  no  provision,  with  the  possible  exception  of  that 
which  prohibited  slavery,  has  exerted  a  more  profound  influence 
on  the  life  of  the  nation,  than  this:  "  Religion, morality, and  knowl- 
edge, being  necessary  to  good  government  and  the  happiness  of 
mankind,  schools  and  the  means  of  education  shall  forever  be  en- 
couraged." This  sentence  was  the  cornerstone  in  the  foundation 
of  the  free  public  school  system  which  has  supplanted  the  private 
and  quasi-public  academies  and  colleges  and  made  possible  the 
development  of  an  educated  and  useful  citizenship  in  a  rapidly 
growing  and  expanding  democratic  society.  It  established  a 
precedent  that  has  been  an  inspiration  and  a  source  of  strength  to 
the  advocates  of  public  education,  even  to  the  present  time. 
No  other  one  thing  has  contributed  as  much  to  the  development 
of  the  national  policy  of  public  education  as  has  this  provision  in 
the  Northwest  Ordinance  of  1787.^^ 


22  For  a  brief  summary  of  the  educational  significance  of  the  Ordinance  of 
1787  in  the  Northwest,  see  Moore:  The  Northwest  Under  Three  Flags,  pp.  328-29, 


CHAPTER  VI 
THE  LAND  SALES  OF  1787  AND  1788 

The  Ordinance  of  1785  was  still  in  effect  in  1787,  but  it  had 
failed  to  promote  land  sales,  largely  because  of  the  restive  state  of 
the  Indians,  the  slowness  of  the  surveys,  and  the  cumbersome  pro- 
vision of  the  ordinance  for  sales  in  each  of  the  thirteen  states. 
On  the  twenty-first  of  April,  1787,  Congress  changed  this  provision 
of  the  ordinance  and  provided  for  the  sale  of  lands  at  the  seat  of 
the  federal  government,  as  soon  as  the  land  for  the  soldiers  was 
drawn  in  the  states.^  Congress  further  amended  the  ordinance  by 
providing  that  lands  might  be  sold  on  credit,  the  terms  being  that 
one-third  of  the  purchase  price  should  be  paid  at  the  time  of 
purchase  and  the  balance  within  three  months.  The  provision 
that  no  lands  should  be  offered  for  sale  until  the  first  seven  ranges 
were  surveyed  was  also  changed  so  that  sales  could  be  made  im- 
mediately, although  the  survey  of  only  four  ranges  had  been  com- 
pleted. But  even  with  these  amendments  the  Ordinance  of  1785 
did  not  greatly  increase  the  sale  of  lands.  The  Indians  were  still 
uneasy  or  even  hostile  and  the  organisation  of  large  companies 
such  as  the  Ohio  Company  and  the  proposed  private  sales  by 
contract  tended  to  discourage  the  buying  of  lands  at  the  public 
sales.  The  important  sales  of  these  years,  1 787-1 788,  were  not 
those  made  under  the  provisions  of  the  Ordinance  of  1785,  but 
those  private  sales  made  by  contract,  after  the  enactment  of  the 
Ordinance  of  1787. 

The  Ordinance  of  1787  was  an  ordinance  for  government  and 
contained  no  provisions  respecting  the  sales  of  lands.  The  ordi- 
nance has  become  associated  with  the  land  question  because  of  its 
connection  with  the  purchase  of  the  Ohio  Company  and  also 
because  of  the  means  which  were  subsequently  adopted  for  ful- 
filling the  requirements  of  the  article  in  the  ordinance  concerning 
the  encouragernent  of  schools  and  the  means  of  education.  These 
requirements  were  stated  in  the  most  general  terms.  The  article 
simply  stated  that  "religion,  morality,  and  knowledge,  being  nec- 
essary to  good  government  and  the  happiness  of  mankind,  schools 

*  Jour,  of  Congress,  IV,  p.  739.     See  also  Treat:  p.  44. 
54 


The  Land  Sales  of  1787  and  1788  55 

and  the  means  of  education  shall  be  encouraged. "^  The  encour- 
agement of  schools  and  the  means  of  education  was  thus  made 
mandatory,  but  by  whom  or  by  what  means  such  encouragement 
was  to  be  given  was  not  made  clear  in  the  ordinance.  As  this 
provision  was  a  part  of  the  Articles  of  Compact  "between  the 
original  States  and  the  people  and  states  in  the  said  territory,"  ^ 
the  presumption  is  that  the  obligation  rested  equally  upon  both 
parties  to  the  compact  and  the  means  for  its  fulfillment  were  left 
to  the  discretion  of  these  parties.  The  national  government  chose 
to  meet  this  obligation  by  the  continuation  of  the  policy  of  making 
land  grants  for  education. 

Congress  had  already  reserved  for  the  maintenance  of  public 
schools  section  sixteen  in  every  township  in  the  Northwest,  sur- 
veyed under  the  Ordinance  of  1785.  The  slow  progress  of  the 
survey  made  the  completion  of  the  first  seven  ranges  far  distant 
and  the  completion  of  the  second  seven  ranges  seemed  to  lie  in  a 
dim  and  remote  future.  Therefore,  after  General  Parsons  pre- 
sented the  memorial  of  the  Ohio  Company  for  the  purchase  of 
lands  lying  west  of  the  first  seven  ranges  and  extending  along  the 
Ohio  to  the  Scioto  river,  Congress  came  to  interpret  the  Ordinance 
of  1785  as  applying  primarily  to  the  first  seven  ranges.  Under 
these  circumstances  it  was  deemed  advisable,  especially  by  the 
purchasers  of  lands  west  of  the  first  seven  ranges^  that  definite 
provisions  be  made  for  the  encouragement  of  education  in  that 
part  of  the  Northwest  Territory. 

The  relation  of  the  Ordinance  of  1787  to  the  ordinance  authoriz- 
ing the  contract  with  the  Ohio  Company  has  already  been  ex- 
plained. It  was  expected  by  the  agents  of  the  company,  Cutler 
and  Sargent,  that  the  general  provision  concerning  education  in 
the  ordinance  for  government  would  be  supplemented  by  the 
terms  of  the  contract  for  the  lands.  Cutler  submitted  to  Congress 
the  terms  on  which  the  Ohio  Company  would  purchase  lands. 
These  included  the  reservation  of  every  section  sixteen  for  educa- 
tion, every  section  twenty-nine  for  religion,  and.  two  complete 
townships  for  a  university.  These  last  two  provisions  were  the 
ones  which  created  in  Congress  such  strong  opposition  to  the  Ohio 


2  Article  III  of  the  Articles  of  Compact. 

3  It  is  curious  that  Webster  so  valiantly  and  successfully  attacked  this  same 
fallacy  in  the  State  Rights  doctrine  and  at  the  same  time  attempted  to  im- 
mortalize Dane  as  author  of  the  Ordinance  of  1787. 


56    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

Company.*  Cutler  was  on  the  point  of  giving  up  the  attempt  to 
make  the  contract  when  he  was  approached  by  Colonel  Duer, 
Secretary  of  the  Board  of  Treasury,  with  the  proposition  to  extend 
the  purchase  of  the  Ohio  Company  to  include  approximately 
five  millions  of  acres  of  land  for  another  company,^  in  which  were 
associated  many  of  the  "principal  characters  of  America."  Cutler 
said  that  Duer  enjoined  him  to  profound  secrecy  and  offered 
"generous  conditions"  if  Cutler  would  "accomplish  the  business" 
for  the  company. «  Cutler  promised  to  undertake  this  additional 
purchase  and  thenceforth  the  Ohio  Company  met  with  less  op- 
position. Congress  enacted  the  ordinance  authorizing  the  sale 
on  the  terms  which  Cutler  and  Sargent  had  dictated.  In  his 
diary  Dr.  Cutler  has  left  the  record  that  "without  connecting  this 
speculation,  similar  terms  and  advantages  could  not  have  been 
obtained  for  the  Ohio  Company."  ^  Cutler's  grandchildren  under- 
took to  explain  this  agreement  between  Cutler  and  Duer.  The 
following  quotation  is  their  interpretation  of  the  transaction : 

"The  injunction  of  secrecy  was  as  to  the  fact  of  the  increased 
amount  of  land  bjeing  obtained  for  a  separate  company.  The 
"generous  conditions"  were,  that  if  Dr.  Cutler  would  secure,  for 
the  entire  amount  of  lands  asked  for,  the  support  of  the  members 
of  Congress  who  had  declared  in  favor  of  the  Ohio  Company  grant, 
Colonel  Duer  and  his  friends  would  undertake,  with  Cutler's 
assistance,  to  obtain  enough  additional  votes  to  pass  the  ordinance 
for  the  purchase  of  the  entire  tract  upon  exactly  the  terms  stated 
in  the  Ohio  Company's  petition.  This  included  the  grants  of  land 
for  the  establishment  of  a  university  and  the  support  of  the  uni- 
versity, which,  next  to  the  accomplishment  of  the  purchase  itself, 
were  the  objects  most  desired  by  Dr.  Cutler. 

"Colonel  Duer  also  agreed  that  Cutler  and  Sargent  should  have 
for  themselves,  and  such  of  their  friends  among  the  prominent 
men  in  the  Ohio  Company  as  they  chose  to  interest,  one-half  in- 
terest in  the  proposed  right  of  purchase,  the  sale  of  which  he  and 
his  friends  would  undertake  to  manage."^ 

Dr.  Cutler's  diary  throws  no  definite  light  on  those  "generous 
conditions"  beyond  the  fact  that  they  were  offered.     His  grand- 

<  See  Treat:  p.  51. 

5  The  Scioto  Company. 

«  Cutler:  I,  p.  295. 

7  Ibid.,  p.  305. 

8  Ibid.,  pp.  494-95. 


The  Land  Sales  of  1787  and  1788  57 

children  cite  no  authority  as  a  basis  for  their  interpretation  of 
those  conditions.  Apparently  their  conclusions  were  drawn  from 
the  circumstantial  evidence  of  the  events  that  followed  the  agree- 
ment between  Cutler  and  Duer.  On  this  basis  the  conclusions 
seem  to  be  wholly  within  reason.  Certainly  the  facts,  so  far  as 
known,  leave  little  doubt  that  the  interests  of  the  Ohio  Company 
were  materially  furthered  by  connecting  them  with  the  larger  land 
speculation  of  the  Scioto  Company.  The  terms  which  Cutler 
proposed  to  Congress  were  granted  in  every  detail,  and  in  so  far 
as  education  is  concerned,  the  ordinance  which  authorized  the  sale 
of  lands  on  these  terms  was  of  much  greater  importance  than  the 
ordinance  for  the  government  of  the  Northwest  Territory. 

This  ordinance,  as  passed  in  Congress,  July  23,  1787,  authorized 
the  Board  of  Treasury  to  contract  with  any  person  or  persons  for  a 
tract  of  land  which  should  be  bounded :  on  the  south  by  the  Ohio 
river  from  the  mouth  of  the  Scioto  to  the  western  boundary  of  the 
seventh  range  of  townships,  surveyed  under  the  Ordinance  of 
1785;  thence  north  along  this  western  boundary  to  the  northern 
boundary  of  the  tenth  township  from  the  Ohio  river;  thence  due 
west  to  the  Scioto ;  thence  south  along  the  Scioto  to  the  beginning. 
The  terms  authorized  were  as  follows:^ 

1.  The  exterior  lines  were  to  be  run  by  the  United  States  and 
plots  furnished  to  the  Board  of  Treasury  and  to  the  purchasers. 

2.  The  purchasers  were,  within  seven  years  after  the  comple- 
tion of  the  exterior  lines,  to  lay  off  the  whole  tract  into  townships 
and  lots  according  to  the  Ordinance  of  1785,  and  make  complete 
returns  to  the  Board  of  Treasury. 

3.  Section  sixteen  in  each  township  was  to  be  given  perpetually 
for  the  maintenance  of  public  schools  within  the  townships,  as 
provided  in  the  Ordinance  of  1785. 

4.  Section  twenty-nine  of  each  township  was  to  be  given  per- 
petually for  the  purposes  of  religion. 

5.  Sections  eight,  eleven,  and  twenty-six  were  to  be  reserved  for 
the  future  disposition  of  Congress. 

6.  Not  more  than  two  complete  townships  were  to  be  given 
perpetually  for  the  purposes  of  a  university,  to  be  laid  off  by 
the  purchasers,  as  near  the  center  as  possible,  the  same  to  be  of 
good  land,  to  be  applied  to  the  intended  object  by  the  legislature 
of  the  state. 


5  Printed  in  full  in  Cutler:  II,  pp.  427-29. 


58    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

7.  The  price  was  to  be  not  less  than  one  dollar  per  acre,  not  in- 
cluding the  reservations  and  gifts,  payable  in  specie,  loan  office 
certificates,  reduced  to  specie  value,  or  certificates  of  the  liqui- 
dated debt  of  the  United  States. 

8.  One- third  of  a  dollar  per  acre  was  allowed  as  a  reduction  for 
bad  lands  and  incidental  charges. 

9.  Military  bounty  rights  could  be  offered  in  payment  for  the 
lands  up  to  one-seventh  of  the  total  purchase  price. 

10.  Five  hundred  thousand  dollars  were  to  be  paid  at  the  time 
of  signing  the  contract,  and  the  balance  when  the  exterior  lines 
were  run  by  the  United  States. 

11.  The  purchasers  were  to  give  good  security  for  the  unpaid 
balance. 

12.  The  grant  was  to  be  made  when  the  full  purchase  price  was 
paid. 

Such  were  the  terms  of  the  ordinance  as  passed  on  July  23,  1787. 
On  July  26,1"  Cutler  and  Sargent  accepted  these  terms  on  condi- 
tion that  the  following  amendments  were  made : 

1.  The  requirement  of  subordinate  surveys  by  the  purchasers 
was  not  to  be  enforced  in  case  of  Indian  interference. 

2.  One  half  million  dollars  should  be  paid  when  the  contract  was 
signed,  a  second  half  million  when  the  exterior  lines  were  run,  and 
the  balance  in  six  equal  payments,  computed  from  the  day  of  the 
second  payment. 

3.  The  lands  for  the  university  should  be  near  the  center  of  the 
first  million  and  a  half  of  acres  purchased,  in  order  to  hasten  its 
establishment. 

4.  Upon  making  the  second  payment,  the  purchasers  should 
receive  a  deed  to  as  much  land  as  they  had  then  paid  for,  the 
term  of  further  deeds  to  be  agreed  upon  by  the  purchasers  and  the 
Board  of  Treasury. 

5.  The  lands  should  be  considered  as  "good  and  sufficient 
security"  for  the  deferred  payments,  as  required  in  the  ordinance. 

The  Board  of  Treasury,  to  whom  these  amendments  and  condi- 
tions were  submitted  by  Cutler  and  Sargent,  referred  them  to 
Congress.  The  next  day,  July  27,  1787,  Congress  agreed  to  these 
terms,  with  the  further  stipulation  that  the  six  equal  deferred 
payments  should  be  made  half-yearly  with  interest  from  the 

1"  Letter  of  Cutler  and  Sargent  to  the  Board  of  Treasury,  from  Journals  of 
Congress,  IV,  Appendix,  p.  17.     Reprinted  in  full  in  Cutler:  II,  pp.  429-30. 


The  Land  Sales  of  lyS'j  and  1788  59 

completion  of  the  exterior  survey.^^  Three  months  later,  October 
27,  Cutler  and  Sargent  made  two  contracts  on  these  terms,  one  for 
the  Ohio  Company  for  1,500,000  acres  and  the  other  for  the  Scioto 
Company  for  about  5,000,000  acres.  The  price  fixed  in  the  ordi- 
nance was  one  dollar  per  acre,  but  the  deductions  for  bad  lands 
reduced  this  to  two-thirds  of  a  dollar.  Certificates  of  indebted- 
ness, which  were  acceptable  for  the  purchase  of  lands,  were  worth 
about  twelve  cents  on  the  dollar  at  the  time  of  these  sales,  and  as  a 
consequence,  the  actual  price  agreed  upon  was  about  nine  cents 
per  acre.^^ 

The  methods  which  were  used  to  secure  the  enactment  of  the 
ordinance  authorizing  these  contracts  and  the  ordinance  itself 
have  been  seriously  questioned  in  recent  years.  Beyond  question 
the  provisions  of  the  ordinance  were  not  in  complete  harmony 
with  the  system  of  surveys  and  sales  which  was  established  by  the 
Ordinance  of  1785.  It  has  been  said  that  these  sales  by  con- 
tract made  necessary  the  suspension  of  the  Ordinance  of  1785.^^ 
In  a  measure  this  was  true.  However,  these  private  contracts  did 
not  affect  the  application  of  the  Ordinance  of  1785  to  the  first  seven 
ranges.  There  is  no  doubt  that  the  favorable  terms  which  the 
Ohio  Company  was  able  to  offer  under  their  contract  seriously 
interfered  with  the  public  sales  of  the  lands  lying  within  the  first 
four  ranges,  but  there  was  no  suspension  of  the  Ordinance  of  1785. 

As  has  already  been  pointed  out.  Congress  had  come  to  believe 
that  the  Ordinance  of  1785  applied  primarily  to  the  first  seven 
ranges  in  the  Northwest  Territory.  It  should  be  noted,  however, 
that  the  ordinance  which  authorized  the  private  sales  recognized 


"  Cutler:  II,  p.  430. 

12  For  fuller  treatment  of  this  point  see  Geer:  Louisiana  Purchase  and  the 
Westward  Movement  in  History  of  North  America,  VIII,  p.  97.  Also  Treat: 
pp.  50  ff. 

13  Speaking  of  the  application  of  the  Ohio  Company  for  the  private  pur- 
chase of  lands,  Treat  says:  "Under  ordinary  circumstances  such  a  proposal 
would  doubtless  have  been  rejected,  for  it  called  for  the  virtual  suspension  of 
the  Land  Ordinance  even  before  it  had  been  tried;  it  sought  the  corporate  owner- 
ship of  an  immense  area  instead  of  the  small  holdings  encouraged  by  the  ordi- 
nance; and  by  offering  fifty  cents  an  acre  it  would  impair  the  approaching  sale 
of  the  four  ranges.     But  these  were  no  ordinary  times."     Treat:  p.  48. 

It  should  be  noted  that  the  nominal  price  paid  in  the  contract,  as  finally 
drawn,  was  one  dollar  per  acre,  the  minimum  price  established  in  the  Ordinance 
of  1785.  It  is  worth  noting  also  that  while  the  Ohio  Company  proposed  to 
purchase  a  vast  tract  of  land,  the  articles  of  agreenient  which  created  the  com- 
pany safeguarded  against  land  monopoly  and  provided  for  the  immediate  sub- 
division of  the  tract  into  small  individual  holdings.  The  Scioto  Company  and 
its  intentions  were  a  "profound  secret  to  Congress." 


6o    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

the  validity  of  the  Ordinance  of  1785.^*  In  so  far  as  the  method 
of  sale  was  concerned  the  ordinances  were  in  opposition ;  as  regards 
the  price  of  the  lands  they  were  substantially  in  agreernent,  be- 
cause it  was  scarcely  probable  that  more  than  the  minimum  price 
of  one  dollar  per  acre  could  have  been  obtained  at  public  auction 
for  so  large  a  tract  of  land.  The  system  of  surveys  was  practi- 
cally the  same.  With  respect  to  special  gifts  and  reservations  the 
ordinance  authorizing  the  sales  by  contract  was  supplementary  to 
the  Ordinance  of  1785  rather  than  in  opposition  to  it.  The  reser- 
vation of  the  sixteenth  sections  for  schools  was  a  provision  of  both 
ordinances,  but  in  the  later  ordinance  two  complete  townships 
were  also  given  for  the  support  of  a  university.  The  reservation 
of  the  twenty-ninth  sections  for  the  support  of  religion,  which  had 
been  stricken  from  the  Ordinance  of  1785  by  a  legislative  accident, 
was  made  a  part  of  the  later  ordinance.^^  But  in  the  light  of  all 
the  facts  this  is  merely  a  point  of  difference  rather  than  a  point  of 
opposition  between  the  two  ordinances.  It  is  reasonable  to  con- 
clude that  Congress,  neither  in  intention  nor  in  fact,  violated  or 
suspended  the  Ordinance  of  1 785  in  the  act  which  authorized  the 
contracts  for  the  sale  of  large  tracts  of  land  lying  west  of  the  first 
seven  ranges  in  the  Northwest  Territory. 

The  fact  that  Cutler  and  Sargent  made  two  contracts  with  the 
Board  of  Treasury,  one  for  the  Ohio  Company  and  the  other  for 
the  Scioto  Company,  has  already  been  stated.  A  brief  sketch 
of  the  Scioto  Company  and  its  relation  to  the  Ohio  Company  is  not 
out  of  place  here.  The  contract  with  the  Ohio  Company  was  for 
the  purchase  of  1,500,000  acres.  Colonel  Duer  made  a  loan  of 
$143,000  to  the  Ohio  Company  to  enable  it  to  make  the  first 
payment. ^^  The  other  contract,  which  was  for  the  Scioto  Com- 
pany, was  in  the  name  of  Cutler  and  Sargent,  "for  themselves  and 
associates."     It  was  not  a  contract  for  the  outright  purchase  of 


"  In  Cutler:  I,  p.  364,  the  position  is  taken  that  "the  contract  for  sale  of  a 
large  tract  of  the  lands  to  the  Ohio  Company  was  made  in  direct  violation  of 
the  Ordinance  of  May  20,  1785,  although  that  ordinance  was  in  force  at  the 
time  and  remained  so  until  July  9,  1788."  This  view  is  evidently  based  on  a 
misapprehension  of  many  of  the  important  facts  involved. 

^5  This  gift  of  section  29  for  religious  purposes  is  found  only  in  the  contracts 
of  Cutler  and  Sargent  and  of  J.  C.  Symmes  for  the  Symmes  Purchase.  For  a 
discussion  of  this  point  see  Treat:  pp.  281  ff. 

1^  In  Cutler:  I,  p.  497,  is  this  statement:  "As  a  consideration  to  the  Ohio 
Company  for  permitting  the  contract  (for  the  Scioto  Company)  to  be  made 
under  cover  of  its  petition,  Colonel  Duer  advanced  to  it  $143,000  in  securities 
to  enable  it  to  complete  the  first  payment  to  the  Board  of  Treasury.     .     .     ." 


The  Land  Sales  of  1787  and  1788  61 

lands,  but  an  option  to  purchase  a  tract  of  land,  lying  north  of  the 
Ohio  Company's  tract,  estimated  at  3,500,000  acres,  but  which 
later  proved  to  contain  approximately  5,000,000  acres. 

Cutler  and  Sargent  transferred  their  option  to  purchase  to 
Colonel  Duer  and  his  associates.  The  ownership  of  this  option 
was  then  divided  into  thirty  shares;  Duer  held  thirteen  for  himself 
and  associates,  Cutler  and  Sargent  held  thirteen,  and  the  four  re- 
maining shares  were  held  jointly  and  were  to  be  sold  in  Europe. 
It  was  thought  that  these  four  shares  would  have  a  ready  sale 
among  the  foreign  holders  of  the  depreciated  securities  of  the 
United  States. 

Joel  Barlow  was  sent  to  France  in  May,  1788.  There  he  met 
William  Playfair,  whom  Barlow  characterized  as  "an  Englishman 
of  a  bold  and  enterprising  spirit"  with  "a  good  imagination." 
Together  they  issued  a  "Prospectus  for  an  establishment  on  the 
Rivers  Ohio  and  Scioto."  It  was  based  upon  a  report  of  Hutchins, 
the  Geographer  of  the  United  States,  and  upon  Dr.  Cutler's  "  Ex- 
planation of  the  Map  which  delineates  that  part  of  the  Federal 
Lands  comprehended  between  Pennsylvania,  the  rivers  Ohio, 
Scioto,  and  Lake  Erie,"  a  pamphlet  which  had  been  printed  at 
Salem  in  1787.  Play  fair's  imagination  seems  to  have  assisted 
materially  in  making  the  prospectus  attractive.  With  the  aid  of 
this  prospectus  Barlow  and  Playfair  succeeded  in  selling  practi- 
cally  all  of  the  lands  controlled  by  the  original  option  to  the  Com- 
pany of  the  Scioto,  which  was  organized  in  Paris  for  the  purpose. 

The  checkered  and  disastrous  career  of  the  Scioto  Company  is  of 
no  importance  here.^^  Playfair  collected  all  of  the  money  and,  for 
some  unexplained  reason,  refused  to  turn  it  over  to  Colonel  Duer 
who  represented  all  of  the  holders  of  the  option ;  hence  no  payments 
could  be  made  to  the  United  States.  Barlow  and  Playfair  sent  a 
band  of  settlers  to  America,  but,  through  error,  had  given  them 
deeds  to  lands  owned  by  the  Ohio  Company.  The  mismanage- 
ment of  the  Scioto  Company  connected  with  the  panic  of  1792, 
wrought  the  ruin  of  Colonel  Duer  and  many  of  his  associates, 
including  Colonel  Richard  Piatt,  who  was  also  treasurer  of  the 
Ohio  Company.  To  relieve  the  distress  of  the  French  immigrants 
Congress  finally,  in  March,  1795,  made  a  special  grant  of  24,000 
acres  in  what  became  Scioto  County,  Ohio. 

1'  For  the  history  of  the  Scioto  Company  see  Cutler:  I,  Chap.  2.  A  History 
of  the  Scioto  Purchase  by  E.  C.  Dawes.    See  also,  Treat:  pp.  58-59. 


62    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

When  the  facts  concerning  the  secret  agreement  between  Cutler 
and  Duer  became  known  some  of  the  members  of  the  Ohio  Com- 
pany charged  that  Cutler  and  Sargent  had  transferred,  without 
consideration,  the  property  of  the  Ohio  Company  when  they  sur- 
rendered their  option  to  Colonel  Duer  and  his  associates.  Cutler 
easily  disproved  this  charge.  But  at  best  the  whole  transaction 
presents  a  curious  and  somewhat  sad  spectacle. 

Colonel  Duer,  as  secretary  of  the  Board  of  Treasury,  was  the 
agent  of  the  United  States.  Cutler  and  Sargent  were  openly  the 
agents  of  the  Ohio  Company,  but  secretly  the  agents  of  Duer  and 
his  associates.  In  the  grant  of  the  option  to  Cutler  and  Sargent 
by  the  Board  of  Treasury  Duer  was,  to  all  intents  and  purposes, 
making  a  contract  with  himself.  Then  there  is  Carrington's 
statement,  referring  to  the  Ohio  Com-pany:  ''This  company  is 
formed  of  the  best  men  in  Connecticut  and  Massachusetts,  and 
they  will  move  out  immediately.  I  am  about  to  join  them  with  a 
few  shares."^*  There  is  no  evidence  that  Carrington  knew  of  the 
secret  deal  between  Cutler  and  Duer  or  that  he  was  influenced  in 
favor  of  authorizing  the  contract  with  the  Ohio  Company  by  the 
prospect  of  becoming  a  share-holder  in  the  venture.  No  thought 
of  impropriety  seems  to  have  come  to  him  on  this  score.  It  is  not 
improbable  that  other  members  of  Congress  were  offered  the  op- 
portunity to  become  share-holders  in  the  company  to  which  they 
granted  such  favorable  terms.  It  may  be  that  they  were  number- 
ed among  the  "principal  characters  in  America."  Without  doubt 
many  facts  connected  with  the  passage  of  the  ordinance  which 
authorized  the  private  sales,  and  with  the  contracts  between  the 
Board  of  Treasury  and  Cutler  and  Sargent  would  be  condemned 
to-day  as  disgraceful  or  even  corrupt.  But  the  men  who  partici- 
pated in  those  transactions  should  be  judged  by  the  standards  of 
their  time  and  not  by  the  dictates  of  the  public  conscience  of  the 
present.  However,  the  concern  here  is  not  with  how  the  contracts 
were  obtained,  but  with  their  effects  upon  education.  Before 
drawing  any  conclusions  as  regards  this  point  a  brief  account  will 
be  given  of  a  third  private  land  sale. 

In  August,  1787,^^  John  Cleve  Symmes  petitioned  for  a  purchase 
of  one  million  acres  of  lands  lying  between  the  Great  and  Little 
Miami  rivers,  on  terms  similar  to  those  granted  to  Cutler  and 

i»  Carrington  to  Monroe,  Aug.  7,  1787.     In  Bancroft:  II,  p.  437. 
"  Cutler:  I,  p.  403. 


The  Land  Sales  of  1787  and  1788  63 

Sargent.  Symmes  asked  for  only  one  township  for  an  academy 
instead  of  the  two  townships  given  to  Cutler  and  Sargent  for  a 
university.  On  the  twenty-ninth  of  August  Congress  authorized 
the  Board  of  Treasury  to  make  the  sale.^®  In  October,  1787, 
Congress  resolved  to  give  no  more  lands  for  seminaries  or  acade- 
mies in  connection  with  private  contracts  unless  the  purchases 
were  as  large  as  that  of  the  Ohio  Company,  and  in  some  state 
other  than  Ohio.^^  Almost  a  year  later,  October  15,  1788, 
Symmes  signed  a  contract  for  one  million  acres  on  the  east  side  of 
the  Great  Miami  River.  The  terms  of  his  contract  were  similar  to 
those  granted  Cutler  and  Sargent,  but  Symmes  received  no  grant 
for  an  academy .^^  Symmes  proceeded  to  sell  lands  under  contract, 
but  for  some  unexplained  reason,  he  also  sold  lands  lying  beyond 
his  purchase.  Four  years  later,  April  12,  1792 ,2^  Congress  cleared 
the  title  to  these  lands  by  extending  Symmes's  contract  to  include 
them.  On  May  5,  1792,2^  Congress  made  further  concessions  to 
Symmes  by  permitting  him  to  receive  a  patent  to  all  the  lands  for 
which  he  had  paid  and  by  making  a  donation  of  one  township  for 
an  academy.  This  last  concession  was  made  because  of  the  en- 
largement of  the  contract.  In  this  way  was  renewed  the  policy  of 
making  special  land  grants  for  higher  and  secondary  education 
which  had  been  inaugurated  in  the  contracts  with  Cutler  and 
Sargent. 

Symmes  again  made  sales  beyond  the  limits  of  his  purchase  and 
for  several  years  petitioned  Congress  to  permit  him  to  complete 
his  original  purchase  for  one  million  acres.  Congress  refused 
these  petitions  because  the  lands  were  then  selling  for  at  least  two 
dollars  an  acre,  while  Symmes's  contract  called  for  only  sixty-six 
and  two-thirds  cents  an  acre.^^ 

By  these  private  sales  to  Symmes  and  to  the  Ohio  and  Scioto 
Companies  Congress  had  expected  to  dispose  of  more  than  six 

20  Jour,  of  American  Congress,  IV,  Appendix,  p.  18. 
2i/64(/.,  p.  802. 

22  For  a  complete  outline  of  the  history  of  the  Symmes  purchase  see  the  report 
of  the  Attorney  General  of  the  United  States  in  American  State  Papers,  Public 
Lands,  I,  No.  72.  The  following  documents  also  relate  to  this  purchase:  I., 
Nos.  23,  33,  34,  55,  70. 

23  Annals  of  Congress,  17QI-93,  III,  p.  1357. 
2*  Ibid.,  p.  1374. 

^  There  is  nothing  to  show  that  Symmes  intentionally  sold  lands  which  he 
had  not  purchased.  He  seems  to  have  been  confused  by  the  fact  that  his  con- 
tract called  for  1,000,000  acres,  within  certain  boundaries,  but  when  the  lines 
were  run  it  was  found  that  the  boundaries  contained  approximately  600,000 
acres. 


64    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

millions  of  acres  of  land.  The  difficulties  into  which  Symmes  fell 
and  the  failure  of  the  Scioto  Company,  which  also  so  involved  the 
Ohio  Company  that  it  was  forced  to  ask  for  special  concessions  and 
a  reduction  in  its  contract,  decreased  the  actual  sales  to  less  than 
1,300,000  acres,  and  Congress  made  donations  of  more  than  100,- 
000  acres  to  the  Ohio  and  Scioto  Companies,  largely  to  protect  the 
actual  settlers.  As  a  business  venture  these  sales  by  contract  were 
unsuccessful,  but  the  United  States  was  compensated  for  the 
financial  loss  by  the  development  of  the  Northwest  which  was 
carried  on  by  the  settlers  on  the  lands  thus  sold. 

The  great  importance  of  these  private  contracts  was  in  their 
influence  upon  the  national  policy  of  land  grants  for  special  pur- 
poses. The  grant  of  every  section  twenty-nine  for  the  support 
of  religion  was  a  provision  of  these  contracts,  and  the  history  of 
these  grants  and  of  the  forces  which  led  Congress  finally  to 
abandon  this  policy  of  making  such  gifts  is  not  without  interest, 
but  is  out  of  place  here.  The  influence  of  these  contracts  in  shap- 
ing the  national  policy  of  supporting  public  education  by  land 
grants  is  of  even  greater  interest  and  importance.  As  will  be 
shown  in  another  connection,  during  the  decade  just  after  the 
adoption  of  the  Constitution  there  was  grave  danger  that  the  new 
government  would  abandon  this  policy  which  had  been  established 
by  the  Congress  of  the  Confederation.  It  was  at  that  time  that 
the  influence  of  these  contracts  was  exerted  in  the  firm  reestablish- 
ment  of  the  policy  of  federal  land  grants  for  education.  In  the 
proper  place  the  means  by  which  this  influence  was  brought  to 
bear  will  be  explained.  It  is  sufficient  here  to  summarize  briefly 
the  provisions  in  these  contracts  which  were  of  significance  for 
public  education. 

The  two  educational  provisions  in  the  contracts  were  (i)  that 
every  section  sixteen  should  be  given  perpetually  for  the  main- 
tenance of  public  schools  within  the  township,  (2)  that  not  more 
than  two  complete  townships,  near  the  center  of  the  first  million 
and  a  half  of  acres,  should  be  given  perpetually  for  the  purposes  of 
a  university.  The  first  of  these  was  but  a  restatement  of  the  pro- 
vision of  the  Ordinance  of  1785.2^    The  Ordinance  of  1785  had 


^  The  clause  in  the  contract  reads  as  follows:  "The  lot  No.  16,  In  each  town- 
ship or  fractional  part  of  a  township,  to  be  given  perpetually  for  the  purposes 
contained  in  the  said  ordinance."  That  is,  the  Ordinance  of  May  20,  1785. 
For  the  text  of  this  contract  see  Cutler:  II,  427-30  or  Jour.  0}  American  Coft' 
gress,  IV,  Appendix,  pp.  17  flf. 


The  Land  Sales  of  ijSy  and  1788  65 

failed  to  promote  the  establishment  of  schools  because  it  had  not 
greatly  encouraged  the  sale  and  settlement  of  the  western  lands. 
The  contracts,  especially  that  with  the  Ohio  Company,  led  to  im- 
mediate, permanent  and  compact  settlements  and  the  early  es- 
tablishment of  schools.  Thus  the  practical  demonstration  of  the 
worth  of  the  principle  of  federal  land  grants  for  education  was  due 
to  this  private  sale  of  lands  by  contract. 

The  second  educational  provision  of  the  contracts  was,  in  some 
respects,  more  important  than  the  first  for  the  reason  that  it  was 
the  first  instance  in  which  federal  aid  was  given  distinctly  to  higher 
education.  Such  terms  as  "schools,"  "public  schools,"  "aca- 
demy," "seminaries  of  learning,"  had  been  used  indiscriminately 
for  years,  but  in  the  contracts  with  Cutler  and  Sargent  there  ap- 
peared the  term  "university."  Among  the  concessions  which 
Congress  made  to  Symmes  in  1792  was  the  grant  of  one  complete 
township  as  a  definite  gift  for  the  support  of  higher  education. ^^ 
The  grants  for  higher  education  provided  in  these  contracts  were 
the  only  ones  made  by  the  Continental  Congress.  It  was  not 
until  after  1800  that  this  policy  was  revived  and  the  great  impor- 
tance of  these  early  grants,  which  then  served  as  a  precedent, 
was  manifest. 

In  many  respects  the  principle  of  granting  a  large  tract  of  land 
for  the  support  of  a  university  was  far  in  advance  of  the  older 
principle  of  granting  one  section  in  each  township  for  the  main- 
tenance of  public  schools  within  the  township.  The  sphere  of 
usefulness  of  the  university  would  necessarily  extend  far  beyond 
its  immediate  environment  and  its  influence  would  be  felt  through- 
out the  territory  or  state.  The  policy  of  granting  each  section 
sixteen  for  the  support  of  education  within  the  township  was  an 
expression  of  New  England  principles  of  local  government.  Its 
adoption  in  the  Northwest  Territory  extended  the  New  England 
town  school  system  and  assisted  in  fixing  upon  the  West  the  dis- 
trict school  with  its  virtues  and  all  of  its  attending  evils.  The 
struggle  to  perpetuate  these  virtues  and  to  overcome  these  evils 
belongs  to  a  much  later  period  in  the  history  of  education  in  the 
United  States.  The  great  contribution  which  the  early  contracts 
for  the  private  sale  of  lands  made  to  the  development  of  the  policy 
of  federal  land  grants  for  public  education  was  that  they  led  to  the 

2^  In  1787  Symmes  had  petitioned  for  a  grant  of  one  complete  township  for 
an  "academy." 


66    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

demonstration  of  the  practicability  of  the  policy  by  the  actual 
establishment  of  schools  through  the  aid  of  such  grants.  In  later 
years  these  concrete  examples  of  the  worth  of  this  system  were  of 
far  more  weight  in  argument  than  any  theory  which  could  be 
brought  against  it. 


CHAPTER  VII 

THE  EDUCATIONAL  WORK  OF  THE  EARLY 
SETTLERS 

It  is  a  well-established  fact  that  the  promoters  of  the  Ohio 
Company  and  other  large  land  speculators  were  in  favor  of  land 
grants  for  the  support  of  both  common  schools  and  higher  educa- 
tion. In  some  cases  the  zeal  for  learning  on  the  part  of  the 
speculators  may  have  been  due  to  their  desire  to  make  their  lands 
as  attractive  as  possible  to  prospective  buyers.  This  is  perhaps 
true  in  the  case  of  the  promoters  of  the  Scioto  Company.  Yet 
there  can  be  no  question  but  that  the  members  of  the  Ohio  Com- 
pany, especially  those  who  were  planning  to  settle  in  the  Ohio 
country,  were  deeply  interested  in  education  and  looked  forward 
to  the  establishment  of  adequate  schools  and  colleges  in  the 
Northwest  as  a  result  of  the  generous  land  grants  for  the  support 
of  education  which  were  secured  by  the  terms  of  the  contract 
between  the  Ohio  Company  and  the  government. 

In  general,  the  New  Englanders  who  settled  in  the  Northwest 
were  in  favor  of  the  establishment  of  schools.  This  is  certainly 
true  of  the  better  class  of  New  Englanders,  from  which  came  so 
many  of  the  leaders  in  the  new  country.  The  New  Englander's 
love  of  local  self-government,  as  expressed  in  township  organiza- 
tion, worked  against  the  development  of  a  sound  and  comprehen- 
sive policy  for  the  use  of  school  lands,  but  on  the  whole.  New  Eng- 
land influence  in  the  Northwest  was  for  education. 

In  so  far  as  the  Symmes  purchase  is  concerned  there  is  reason 
to  think  that  Symmes,  himself,  was  anxious  to  have  the  school 
lands  used  as  soon  as  possible  for  the  establishment  of  schools  and 
colleges.  While  it  may  be  true,  as  Dr.  Cutler  said,  that  Symmes 
had  not  thought  of  land  grants  for  education  until  they  were  made 
to  the  Ohio  Company,^  nevertheless  Symmes  was  careful  to  have 
these  grants  included  in  his  contract.  The  use  to  which  these 
school  lands  was  put  was  determined  by  the  settlers  rather  than  by 
the  promoters  who  sold  the  lands  and,  as  might  be  expected,  there 


*  Cutler:  II,  p.  323. 

67 


68    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

was  no  unanimity  of  purpose  or  opinion  among  the  settlers.  There 
were,  however,  a  great  many  strong  advocates  of  education  among 
the  early  settlers  in  the  Symmes  purchase. 

In  all  the  early  settlements  in  the  Northwest  Territory  there 
was  a  minority,  at  least,  in  favor  of  the  immediate  establishment 
of  schools.  Many  of  the  pioneers  went  into  the  wilderness  with 
the  determination  to  build  a  civilization  equal  to  that  they  left 
behind  them.  Some  even  dreamed  of  founding  a  university  that 
would  be  to  Ohio  what  Harvard  was  to  New  England ;  but  New 
Englanders  were  not  alone  in  their  purpose  to  build  schools  and 
colleges.  Many  settlers  from  the  middle  and  southern  states 
were  staunch  friends  of  education  and  even  Kentucky  played  an 
important  part  in  the  founding  of  some  of  the  earliest  schools  in 
Ohio  by  furnishing  educational  leaders.  The  cause  of  education 
had  many  active  supporters  who  labored  earnestly  and  faithfully 
to  make  the  most  of  the  lands  committed  to  them  in  trust  for  the 
advancement  of  education.  In  order  to  appreciate  the  value  of 
the  service  rendered  by  these  early  friends  of  education  and  to 
understand  the  reasons  for  the  meagerness  of  the  results  of  their 
labors  it  is  necessary  to  take  into  account  some  of  the  difficulties 
which  confronted  them. 

There  were  many  among  the  early  settlers  who  were  indifferent 
to  the  need  for  education  and  who  cared  nothing  for  the  land 
grants  for  schools  and  colleges.  No  doubt  there  were  some  who 
were  actively  opposed  to  education,  but  these  certainly  consti- 
tuted a  very  small  minority.  As  will  be  shown  later,  indifference, 
self-seeking,  and  greed  for  the  school  lands  on  the  part  of  politi- 
cians were  the  greatest  and  most  dangerous  enemies  of  education 
in  the  early  days  of  the  Northwest  Territory. 

Chief  among  the  obstacles  to  the  development  of  schools  was 
the  immediate  need  of  making  a  living  which  every  man  had  to 
meet.  Land  had  to  be  cleared,  houses  built,  crops  planted,  and  a 
multitude  of  smaller  but  no  less  pressing  tasks  performed,  all  of 
which  combined,  consumed  the  time  and  energies  of  the  frontiers- 
men. No  matter  how  great  the  interest  in  education  might  have 
been,  such  interest  was  necessarily  of  secondary  importance. 
Making  a  home  was  the  first  task  of  the  pioneer.  Schools, 
churches,  and  other  institutions  had  to  wait  until  this  first  task 
had  been  accomplished. 

But  making  a  living  and  founding  a  home  were  not  the  only 


The  Educational  Work  of  the  Early  Settlers  69 

burdens  of  the  early  settler  in  the  Ohio  country.  The  settlements 
were  surrounded  by  hostile  Indians  who  were  ready  to  contest 
every  foot  of  advance  of  the  white  man  into  the  wilderness.  Ex- 
posed to  the  constant  danger  of  attack  by  the  savages  and  af- 
forded little  or  no  protection  by  the  national  government  the  fron- 
tiersmen were  thrown  upon  their  own  resources  to  defend  their 
homes  from  destruction  and  their  families  from  murder  or  a 
slavery  worse  than  death.  Under  such  conditions  there  is  little 
wonder  that  schools  received  scant  encouragement ;  the  wonder  is 
that  so  much  was  accomplished  for  education. ^ 

Another  factor  that  worked  against  the  early  establishment  of 
schools  was  the  lack  of  means  of  support.  As  a  general  thing  the 
frontier  people  were  poor.  They  usually  had  plenty  of  food  and 
clothes  and  the  crude  necessities  of  life,  but  rarely  had  surplus 
wealth.  Land  was  the  chief  source  and  form  of  wealth  and  land 
was  plentiful  and  cheap.  The  prices  paid  for  government  lands  by 
the  Ohio  Company  and  other  speculators  were  probably  as  high  or 
higher  than  the  value  of  the  lands  j  ustified .  The  early  land  grants 
for  education  seem  of  enormous  value  when  considered  in  terms  of 
the  value  of  those  lands  to-day,  but  they  were  by  no  means  suf- 
ficient to  meet  the  educational  needs  of  the  early  settlers  in  Ohio. 
Even  with  the  wisest  management  it  would  have  been  necessary  to 
supplement  the  revenue  derived  from  school  lands  in  order  to 
have  established  and  maintained  free  schools.  Unfortunately 
schools  lands  never  received  the  wisest  management,  but  usually 
the  worst.  This  greatly  increased  the  difficulties  of  the  work  of 
founding  schools  by  the  early  settlers. 

There  were  other  things  besides  the  physical  and  economic  con- 
ditions of  frontier  life  and  the  hostility  of  the  Indians  that  retarded 
the  growth  of  schools.  Among  these  was  the  small  and  scattered 
population.  There  is  much  to  be  said  of  the  importance  of  build- 
ings and  other  physical  equipment  in  the  development  of  educa- 
tion, but  after  all,  the  fundamental  essentials  of  a  school  are  pupils 
and  teachers.  Of  course  there  were  children  in  the  early  settle- 
ments, but  even  the  larger  settlements  were  so  small  that  one 
teacher  could  carry  on  all  the  work  of  education  that  was  required. 
In  the  out-lying  districts  schools  were  practically  out  of  the  ques- 

2  Interesting  accounts  of  early  frontier  life  in  Ohio  may  be  found  in  Howe: 
The  Great  West,  I,  Nos.  26,  27,  28,  30;  also  in  Cuming's  Tour,  in  Thwaites:  Early 
Western  Travels,  IV  and  in  F.  A.  Mechaux's  Travels  to  the  West  of  the  Alleghany 
Mountains  in  Thwaites:  Early  Western  Travels,  III. 


70    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

tion  so  long  as  the  danger  from  the  Indians  was  present.  At  first 
glance  it  looks  as  if  it  would  have  been  easy  to  get  teachers  to  sup- 
ply the  needs  of  these  frontier  settlernents,  but  as  a  rnatter  of  fact 
it  was  difficult  to  induce  competent  teachers  to  venture  from  the 
east  into  the  wilds  of  the  upper  Ohio  to  work  for  the  small  salary 
that  could  be  paid.  The  Northwest  in  1790  offered  few  induce- 
ments to  the  ambitious  schoolmaster.^ 

The  greatest  hindrance  to  the  early  development  of  education 
thrpugh  the  use  of  the  congressional  land  grants  was  more  funda- 
mental than  any  of  those  yet  mentioned.  It  was  the  lack  of  social 
unity  among  the  frontier  settlements.  The  population  was 
small  and  widely  dispersed,  with  settlement  focused  about  a  num- 
ber of  small  villages  scattered  over  the  upper  Ohio  valley.  The 
common  danger  from  the  Indians  was  the  strongest  bond  that 
drew  these  settlements  together,  and  even  that  was  weak.  Petty 
jealousy  and  bitter  rivalry  were  not  uncommon  among  these 
frontier  communities*  and,  while  aggressive  hostility  was  not  the 
rule,  active  cooperation  was  rarely  in  evidence. 

The  lack  of  social  unity  was  not  only  a  characteristic  of  the  Ohio 
territory  as  a  whole,  but  it  was  also  manifest  in  each  local  settle- 
ment. Frontier  settlements  were  generally  made  up  of  emigrants 
from  various  sections  of  the  United  States  or  from  Europe,  each 
bringing  with  him  his  opinions  and  prejudices  concerning  educa- 
tion as  well  as  regards  religion  and  politics.  Even  in  those  settle- 
ments when  New  Englanders  were  in  a  large  majority  lack  of 
united  effort  was  a  great  hindrance  to  the  growth  of  schools.  In 
such  cases  the  majority  had  little  regard  for  the  opinions  of  the 
minority  who  therefore  were  opposed  or  indifferent  to  the  plans  of 
the  leaders. 

The  lack  of  unity  of  thought  and  purpose  concerning  education 
within  the  frontier  settlements  was  not  due  solely  to  the  hetero- 
geneous nature  of  their  population  in  point  of  origin.  They  were 
growing  communities  with  a  constant  influx  of  people  who  had  to 
solve  the  first  problems  of  frontier  life,  clear  land  and  make  a 
home.  Many  of  those  who  had  already  accomplished  these  tasks 
were  ready  and  anxious  to  rise  to  a  higher  plane  of  civilization  and 
culture  by  the  development  of  political,  religious  and  educational 
institutions.     These  differences  in  ideals  and  purposes  that  grew 

3  See  Summers:  History  of  Marietta,  pp.  173  ff.     Also  Cutler:  I,  p.  435. 
<  King:  Ohio,  pp.  272-73,  283,  285. 


The  Educational  Work  of  the  Early  Settlers  71 

out  of  the  differences  in  economic  status  continued  to  be  an  impor- 
tant check  on  educational  progress  throughout  the  period  of  rapid 
growth  of  population  in  the  Northwest.  This  can  be  seen  clearly 
in  the  management  of  the  school  lands  in  Ohio  and  other  states 
formed  out  of  the  Northwest  Territory.  Time  alone  could  change 
this  condition  and  before  time  had  done  its  work  schools  had  suf- 
fered great  and  irreparable  loss. 

All  of  the  difficulties  and  hindrances  that  held  back  the  early 
development  of  schools  under  the  policy  of  land  grants  for  educa- 
tion might  be  summarized  and  condensed  into  one  fundamental 
obstacle,  namely,  a  lack  of  solidly  united  public  sentiment  in  favor 
of  schools.  Opinion  ranged  from  positive  opposition  to  education 
to  the  highly  impractical  ideal  of  a  great  western  university  that 
was  so  dear  to  some  of  the  New  England  settlers.  The  failure  to 
transplant  in  all  its  dying  glory  the  outworn  system  of  higher  edu- 
cation which  New  England  had  inherited  from  Old  England  did 
much  to  clear  the  way  for  the  later  educational  progress  of  the 
middle  West.  Regardless  of  the  ultimate  outcome,  the  lack  of 
social  consciousness  of  the  need  for  schools  served  to  obstruct  the 
efforts  of  the  pioneers  to  establish  and  maintain  schools  through 
the  use  of  the  congressional  land  grants  for  education.  What 
these  early  friends  of  education  actually  accomplished  is  at  least 
worthy  of  a  brief  review. 

At  the  last  meeting  in  Massachusetts  of  the  Ohio  Company, 
March  9,  1788,  the  following  resolution  was  adopted:  "That  the 
directors  pay  as  early  attention  as  possible  to  the  education  of  the 
youth  and  the  promotion  of  the  public  worship  among  the  first 
settlers,  and  for  these  important  purposes  they  employ,  if  practi- 
cable, an  instructor,  eminent  for  literary  accomplishments  and  the 
virtue  of  his  character,  who  shall  also  superintend  the  first  scholas- 
tic institution  and  direct  the  manner  of  instruction,  and  enable  the 
directors  to  carry  into  execution  the  intention  expressed  in  the 
resolutions,  the  proprietors  and  others  of  benevolent  and  liberal 
minds  are  earnestly  requested  to  contribute,  by  voluntary  dona- 
tions, to  form  a  fund  to  be  solely  appropriated  thereto."^  The 
first  settlers  on  the  lands  of  the  Ohio  Company  were  scarcely  es- 
tablished in  their  new  homes  before  they  took  steps  to  carry  out 
the  intent  of  this  resolution.     They  built  the  first  schoolhouse  in 


6  Cutler:  II,  p.  3. 


72    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

Ohio,  a  blockhouse  at  Marietta,  in  1789.^  Major  Anselm  Tupper 
was  the  first  teacher  in  this  school.^  The  following  year,  1790,  the 
Ohio  Company  ''appointed  one  hundred  and  fifty  dollars"  of  their 
funds  for  the  support  of  schools  at  Marietta,  Belpre  and  Water- 
ford,  and  schools  were  maintained  at  all  three  points  in  that  year.^ 

The  records  are  not  clear  as  to  the  details  concerning  these  early 
schools.  That  they  were  elementary  schools  there  is  little  doubt, 
but  as  to  the  length  of  the  school  term,  the  course  of  study,  tuition 
charges  or  the  salary  of  the  teacher  nothing  definite  is  known. 
Dr.  Cutler  left  the  record  that  Rev.  David  Story  went  out  to  Ohio 
as  a  preacher  in  1789  at  a  salary  of  five  dollars  a  week  and  board. 
The  Ohio  Company  bore  part  this  expense.^  It  is  not  probable 
that  the  schoolmaster  was  better  paid  than  the  preacher.  Doubt- 
less the  donation  of  the  Ohio  Company  was  supplemented  by 
tuition  fees,  as  was  the  custom  on  the  frontier  at  that  time.  In 
1790  John  Reiley  established  a  private  elementary  school  at 
Columbia,  near  Cincinnati,  and  maintained  it  successfully  by 
charging  a  small  tuition  fee.^^ 

The  first  academy  in  Ohio  was  established  at  Marietta  in  1797. 
On  April  29  of  that  year,  the  citizens  of  Marietta  held  a  meeting 
to  consider  the  problem  of  maintaining  schools.     General  Rufus 


^  Summers,  in  the  History  of  Marietta,  p.  173,  gives  1788  as  the  date  of 
the  first  school.  Dr.  Cutler's  letter  to  Gen.  Putnam,  under  date  of  November 
18,  1788,  substantiates  this  statement.  Certainly  there  was  a  schoolmaster  in 
Marietta  in  1 788.  The  school  building  was  opened  the  following  year.  See  foot- 
note No.  9  for  extract  from  Cutler's  letter. 

'  D.  C.  Shilling:  "Pioneer  Schools  and  Schoolmasters,"  in  Ohio  Arch,  and 
Hist.  Soc.  Publ.,  XXV,  p.  38. 

^  Ihid.;  also  in  Hildreth:  Pioneer  History  of  Ohio,  p.  261. 

^  Cutler:  I,  p.  435.  From  a  letter  of  Dr.  Cutler's  to  General  Putnam,  dated 
Ipswich,  November  18,  1788.  In  this  letter  is  also  the  following:  "Colonel 
Piatt  was  so  engaged  while  I  was  in  New  York,  that  I  could  not  find  the  amount 
of  the  fund  for  preaching  and  schools;  there  is,  however,  a  considerable  sum. 
Colonel  Tallmadge  told  me  he  had  collected  a  considerable  sum,  which  he  should 
pay  into  the  treasury.  I  presume  may  be  drawn  at  any  time  by  order  of  the 
Directors. 

"Mr.  Rogers  has  concluded  not  to  return,  and  I  wish  the  school  may  be 
given  to  Mr.  William  Dodge,  that  he  may  be  considered  a  Grammar  Master, 
but  that  he  take  scholars  of  every  description  at  present.     .     .     . 

"I  have  requested  Colonel  Piatt  to  forward  a  sum,  raised  for  the  support  of 
preachers  and  schoolmasters,  to  the  Directors  at  Muskingum,  of  200  dollars 
(if  he  has  so  much  on  hand)  which  will  enable  you  to  pay  the  preacher  and 
schoolmaster  for  the  present." 

^°  The  custom  was  to  organize  a  school  of  twenty  to  thirty  pupils  who  paid 
from  $1.75  to  $2.25  each  per  quarter.  The  schoolmaster  "boarded  around," 
hence  received  approximately  $60  and  board  and  lodging  per  quarter.  See 
Lewis:  History  of  Higher  Education  in  Kentucky,  p.  31 ;  also  "Pioneer  Schools  and 
Schoolmasters,"  in  Ohio  Arch,  and  Hist.  Soc.  PubL,  XXV,  p.  41. 


The  Educational  Work  of  the  Early  Settlers  73 

Putnam  was  chairman  and  Jonathan  Meigs  was  clerk  of  the  meet- 
ing. A  committee  was  appointed  to  devise  a  plan  for  carrying  on 
the  work  of  education. ^^  The  following  Saturday  this  committee 
reported  a  need  for  one  thousand  dollars  and  recommended  that 
this  amount  be  raised  by  subscription.  The  report  of  the  com- 
mittee was  adopted  and  subscriptions  were  solicited.  General 
Rufus  Putnam  headed  the  list  with  three  hundred  dollars  and 
others  followed  his  generous  example  until  the  thousand  dollar 
mark  was  passed,  eleven  hundred  and  sixty-two  dollars  being 
subscribed. ^2  The  next  week  it  was  decided  to  name  the  institu- 
tion the  Muskingum  Academy  and  a  board  of  trustees  was 
formed.  This  board  set  forth  the  policy  of  the  institution  in 
certain  articles  which  they  adopted.  Among  these  were  the  fol- 
lowing concerning  education  :^^ 

Article  3.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  preceptor  to  teach  the  pupils 
reading,  writing,  arithmetic,  geography,  English  grammar,  and  the  Latin 
and  Greek  languages;  the  different  branches  in  which  a  pupil  is  to  be  taught 
is  to  be  signified  to  the  preceptor  by  the  parent  or  guardian  of  the  pupil. 

Article  5.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  preceptor  to  cause  some  or  all  of 
the  pupils  to  learn  select,  entertaining  and  instructive  speeches  and  dialogues 
adapted  to  their  several  capacities  and  ages  which  they  shall  pronounce  in 
the  Academy  before  such  audience  as  may  attend  on  the  quarter  day, 
which  shall  be  the  last  day  of  every  quarter. 

Article  8.  The  prices  of  tuition  to  be  paid  to  the  preceptor  for  each 
quarter  shall  be:  for  reading  and  writing  two  dollars,  for  arithmetic,  Eng- 
lish grammar,  the  first  rudiments  of  astronomy,  and  geography,  two  dol- 
lars and  fifty  cents.     Latin,  Greek,  and  mathematics,  three  dollars. 

The  board  further  provided  that  a  small  fee  should  be  charged 
for  repairs  to  the  building  and  put  upon  the  preceptor  the  obliga- 
tion of  teaching  the  children  ' '  manners."  School  hours  were  from 
nine  to  twelve  and  from  two  to  five,  except  in  winter  when  the 
afternoon  session  was  from  one-thirty  to  four-thirty. 

The  Muskingum  Academy  opened  in  1800  with  David  Putnam, 
a  graduate  of  Yale,  as  preceptor.  The  work  of  the  academy  grew 
and  progressed  until  1830  when  it  became  a  department  of  the 
Institute  of  Education.  The  other  departments  of  this  institute 
were  an  infant  school,  a  primary  school,  and  a  young  ladies'  semi- 
nary.    In  1833  the  old  academy  or  high  school  department  of  the 

"  W.  W.  Boyd:  "Secondary  Education  in  Ohio  Previous  to  1840,"  in  Ohio 
Arch,  and  Hist.  Soc.  Publ.,  XXV,  p.  129. 
^2  Summers:  History  of  Marietta,  p.  173. 
13  Boyd:  loc.  cit.,  p.  130. 


74    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

Institute  of  Education  was  chartered  separately  as  the  Marietta 
Collegiate  Institute.  Two  years  later  this  institution  was  re- 
chartered  as  Marietta  College,  under  which  name  it  has  continued 
to  the  present  time.^^ 

The  story  of  the  beginnings  of  education  at  Marietta  and  other 
villages  within  the  grant  to  the  Ohio  Company  is  fairly  typical  of 
other  frontier  settlements.  During  the  first  decade,  at  least,  the 
educational  work  was  confined  to  elementary  and  grammar  schools. 
The  land  grants  for  education  were  of  little  or  no  assistance,  since 
school  lands  were  generally  unrented  and,  in  cases  where  they  were 
rented,  they  were  rent  free  for  the  first  five  years.  As  a  conse- 
quence schools  were  supported  by  subscription  and  tuition.  Al- 
though the  early  settlers  succeeded  in  establishing  only  a  few 
elementary  and  grammar  schools  during  the  first  decade  of  their 
residence  on  the  frontier  they  were  none  the  less  interested  in 
higher  education. 

In  September,  1788,  Dr.  Cutler  was  at  Marietta  and  recorded  in 
his  diary  that  a  high  hill  west  of  the  city  was  proposed  as  the  site 
of  the  University.^^  The  following  May  the  Board  of  Directors 
of  the  Ohio  Company  instructed  Dr.  Cutler  and  General  Putnam 
"to  make  such  application  to  Congress  as  they  shall  judge  expe- 
dient for  procuring  a  charter  for  the  University,  and  for  the  en- 
couragement of  learning  in  this  settlement."^®  Both  members  of 
this  committee  had  hopes  of  the  early  establishment  of  the  Uni- 
versity. On  September  28,  1789,  Cutler  wrote  to  Major  Sargent 
that  **  if  Congress  should  be  disposed  to  favor  the  establishment  of 
the  University,  I  am  confident  it  will  have  no  inconsiderable  in- 
fluence on  the  spirit  of  migration  from  this  part  of  the  country. 
I  hope  by  the  time  your  eldest  son  has  completed  his  scholastic 
studies  the  University  will  be  in  condition  to  admit  him."  ^^  The 
next  January  General  Putnam  urged  Dr.  Cutler  to  meet  him  at 
New  York  because  "the  state  of  our  affairs  at  Marietta,  the  Presi- 
dent's speech  respecting  education  and  other  matters,  as  well  as 
the  matters  contained  in  our  commission,  require  the  immediate 
attendance  of  us  both  at  New  York."^^ 


"For  a  full  account  of  Marietta  College  see  I.  W.  Andrews:  "Historical 
Sketch  of  Marietta  College,"  in  Report  of  Common  Schools  in  Ohio,  1885. 

15  Cutler:  I,  p.  417. 

w/6id.,  p.  445. 

"  Ibid.,  p.  449. 

^'Washington's  address  to  Congress,  Jan.  8,  1790,  contained  this  concerning 
education:  "Whether  this  desirable  object  will  be  promoted  by  affording  aids 


The  Educational  Work  of  the  Early  Settlers  75 

The  hope  of  this  committee  was  deferred  for  some  time.  Indian 
troubles  became  serious,  immigration  was  checked,  and  the  Ohio 
Company  fell  into  such  serious  financial  straits  that,  in  1792,  the 
directors  of  the  company  addressed  a  memorial  to  Congress  asking 
for  concessions  as  regards  the  company's  contract.^^  Due  to  Dr. 
Cutler's  ability  as  a  lobbyist  this  memorial  was  referred  by  the 
House  of  Representatives  to  a  committee  which  was  chosen  by 
Cutler  and  his  associates.^^  This  committee  reported  on  a  bill 
highly  favorable  to  the  Ohio  Company.  Seven  hundred  fifty 
thousand  acres  were  conveyed  in  fee  simple  to  the  company  in 
return  for  the  $500,000  in  Continental  securities  which  the  com- 
pany had  paid  to  the  government,  and  two  additional  tracts,  one  of 
214,285  acres  and  the  other  of  100,000  acres,  were  to  be  conveyed 
on  easy  terms.  The  original  reservations  for  education  and  reli- 
gion were  retained  in  the  750,000  acre  tract  but  were  not  granted 
in  the  two  smaller  tracts. ^^  The  Ohio  Company  proceeded  on  its 
own  initiative  to  make  these  donations  for  religion  and  education 
in  these  two  tracts  and  later  petitioned  Congress  to  make  good 
these  grants.     This  petition  was  denied. ^^ 

The  generosity  of  Congress  had  saved  the  Ohio  Company  from 
bankruptcy  and  had  left  it  in  possession  of  the  land  grants  for  reli- 
gion and  education,  although  the  company  had  failed  to  fulfil  the 
conditions  on  which  these  donations  were  made.  As  soon  as 
the  affairs  of  the  company  were  in  a  more  settled  condition  and  the 
title  to  its  lands  was  cleared  the  early  settlers  again  took  up  the 
proposition  of  establishing  a  university.  The  records  of  the  Ohio 
Company,  under  date  of  December  16, 1795,  contain  the  following 
resolution : 

The  reconnoitering  committee  having  reported  that  townships  number 
eight  and  nine  in  the  fourteenth  range  are  the  most  central  in  the  Ohio 
Company's  purchase  and  it  being  fully  ascertained  that  the  lands  are  of  an 
excellent  quality: 

Resolved,  unanimously  that  the  aforesaid  townships  number  eight  and 

to  seminaries  of  learning  already  established,  by  the  institution  of  a  national 
University,  or  by  other  expedients,  will  be  well  worthy  of  a  place  in  the  delib- 
erations of  the  legislature."  St.  Pap.  and  Pub.  Doc.  3rd  Ed.,  I,  p.  15.  Putnam's 
letter  to  Cutler  is  printed  in  Cutler:  I,  p.  451. 

^^  Annals  of  Congress,  1791-93,  p.  494. 

2°  Cutler:  I,  p.  482,  footnote. 

21  Enacted  April  21,  1792.  Annals  of  Congress,  1791,  p.  1363.  Records 
concerning  discussion  of  this  bill  are  on  pp.  494,  540,  558  of  the  same  volume. 

22  Am.  St.  Pap.  P.  L.,  I,  p.  236-37.  This  memorial  was  dated  Jan.  16,  1796. 
Final  action  was  taken  by  Congress  on  Jan.  17,  1806. 


76    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

nine  in  the  fourteenth  ranges  be  reserved  for  the  benefit  of  an  University^ 
as  expressed  in  the  original  contract  with  the  Board  of  Treasury.23 

The  work  of  surveying  these  townships  was  commenced  im- 
mediately, under  the  direction  of  General  Putnam,  but  the  affairs 
of  the  projected  "University"  moved  very  slowly.  Four  years 
later  the  territorial  legislature  appointed  a  committee,  of  which 
General  Putnam  was  chairman,  to  "lay  off  a  town  plot  with  a 
square  for  the  college.  At  that  time  the  income  from  the  Univer- 
sity lands  was  estimated  at  approximately  five  thousand  dollars  by 
General  Putnam. ^^ 

In  the  summer  of  1799  General  Putnam  requested  Dr.  Cutler  to 
draw  up  a  complete  charter  for  a  university  and  send  it  to  him  as 
soon  as  possible.^^  In  reply  to  this  request  Dr.  Cutler  drew  up  a 
charter  for  a  university,  in  which  are  set  forth  the  aims  and  pur- 
poses of  higher  education  as  conceived  by  the  better  class  of  New 
England  settlers  in  Ohio.  Section  one  of  this  charter  reads  as 
follows:  "Be  it  enacted  by  the  General  Assembly  (here  insert  the 

23  C.  L.  Marlzolff :  "Ohio  University"  in  Ohio  Arch,  and  Hist.  Soc.  Publ.,  XIX, 
p.  418.  In  1790  the  Ohio  Company  had  appointed  a  committee  "to  fix  on  the 
two  townships  which  the  Directors,  by  the  contract  with  Congress,  are  obliged 
to  set  apart  for  the  support  of  the  University."  Indians  troubles  prevented 
the  completion  of  this  work.  Jan,  10,  1795,  the  Directors  of  the  company 
resolved  that  the  Committee  appointed  in  1790  for  "the  purpose  of  ascertaining 
and  designating  the  two  townships  reserved  for  the  benefit  of  a  University" 
be  requested  to  complete  the  work  as  soon  as  possible.     Cutler:  II,  pp.  32-33. 

2^  Ohio  Arch,  and  Hist.  Soc.  Publ.,  XIX,  p.  420.  General  Putnam  wrote  to 
Dr.  Cutler,  under  date  of  Feb.  3,  1799,  as  follows:  "That  you  may  have  data  on 
which  to  make  your  calculations  the  following  statement  may  not  be  useless: 

"The  two  University  townships  contain  46,880  acres.  Fortunately,  I  be- 
lieve them  to  be  the  two  best  townships  of  land  in  the  whole  purchase.  They 
are  all,  or  nearly  all,  taken  up  and  settled,  some  in  large  and  some  in  small  tracts. 
The  settlement  commenced  two  years  ago  next  April.  Among  the  settlers  are 
a  number  of  New  England  people;  men  of  considerable  information,  abilities, 
and  industry.  The  number  of  militia  is  about  one  hundred.  They  already 
raise  their  own  provision,  have  a  corn-mill,  etc.  They  none  of  them  expect  to 
have  the  lands  more  than  five  years  rent  free  from  the  time  of  settlement,  and 
the  lowest  permanent  rent  at  which  those  lands  can  be  put,  on  the  average,  I 
conceive,  cannot  be  less  than  twelve  dollars  per  hundred  acres,  which  gives 
$5,529.60  annual  income  for  the  support  of  the  University.  And  as  to  the 
school  and  ministry  lands,  I  suppose  the  whole  quantity  to  be  62,700  acres, 
some  of  which  I  suppose  to  be  extremely  valuable,  as  those  at  Marietta  and  in 
some  other  townships;  others,  I  know,  are  very  poor,  but  after  five  years  culti- 
vation rent  free,  I  will  suppose  them  to  rent  at  six  dollars  the  hundred  acres, 
and  then  the  amount  will  be  3,762  dollars — say  one-half  for  schools  and  one- 
half  for  the  ministry.  Although  these  estimates  are  below  what  I  expect  these 
lands  will  be  ultimately  rented  for,  yet  even  such  an  income,  well-applied  to  the 
different  objects  for  which  it  is  intended  will  be  of  infinite  advantage  to  these 
settlements;  and  some  means  ought  to  be  adopted  as  soon  as  possible  for  bring- 
ing them  into  a  state  of  improvement."     Cutler:  II,  pp.  18-19. 

2fi  Cutler:  II,  p.  22. 


The  Educational  Work  of  the  Early  Settlers  77 

style  of  the  assembly),  that  there  be  a  University  instituted  and 
established,  and  forever  to  remain,  within  the  limits  of  the  tract 
of  land  purchased  by  the  said  Ohio  Company  of  Associates,  by  the 
name  of  the  American  University,  for  the  instruction  of  youth  in 
all  the  various  branches  of  the  liberal  Arts  and  Sciences,  for  the 
promotion  of  good  education,  piety,  religion,  and  morality,  and 
for  conferring  all  the  degrees  and  literary  honors  granted  in  similar 
institutions."  2^ 

The  territorial  legislature  created  the  university,  Jan.  2,  1802, 
with  a  few  important  amendments,  adopting  the  charter  furnished 
by  Dr.  Cutler.  The  legislature  changed  the  name  of  the  institu- 
tion from  "American  University"  to  "American  Western  Uni- 
versity." More  significant  amendments  to  the  original  charter 
were  the  ones  which  created  a  separate  board  for  the  management 
and  control  of  common  school  and  ministerial  lands  and  which 
vested  control  of  the  board  of  trustees  of  the  college  in  the  state 
legislature.-^ 

Since  the  question  of  greatest  public  interest  at  this  time  was 
the  admission  of  Ohio  into  the  Union,  the  affairs  of  the  university 
moved  slowly  until  that  question  was  settled.  On  February  18, 
1804,  the  state  legislature  passed  an  act  "establishing  an  univer- 
sity in  the  town  of  Athens. "^^  By  this  act  the  name  was  changed 
to  Ohio  University. 

The  board  of  trustees  met  for  the  first  term  in  June,  1804,  and 
took  over  the  management  of  the  university  lands.  After  twa 
years  the  board  had  collected  sufficient  funds  from  rents  to  com- 
mence to  build  and  therefore  let  a  contract  for  a  brick  building, 
twenty  by  thirty  feet,  two  stories  high.  After  another  two  years, 
on  March  2,  1808,  the  board  appointed  a  committee  to  report  on  a 
system  "for  opening  the  academy,  providing  a  preceptor,  and, 
conducting  that  branch  of  the  Ohio  University."  ^^  This  com- 
mittee formulated  a  course  of  study  of  Latin,  Greek,  English, 
mathematics,  rhetoric,  logic,  geography,  and  natural  and  moral 
philosophy,  and  selected  Rev.  Jacob  Lindley  as  preceptor.  The 
University  was  opened  and  three  young  men  enrolled.  Thus  began 
the  work  of  the  Ohio  University,  the  oldest  institution  for  higher 

*  The  charter  is  reprinted  in  full  in  Appendix  C. 

2'  Dr.  Cutler,  in  his  charter,  had  placed  the  control  of  these  lands  in  the  hands 
of  the  Trustees  of  the  University.     See  Appendix  C,  Sec.  IX. 
28  Ohio  Arch,  and  Hist.  Soc.  Publ.,  p.  422. 
'•  Ibid.,  p.  424. 


78    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

education  in  the  Old  Northwest  and  the  first  to  be  endowed  with 
funds  derived  from  national  land  grants  for  education.^" 

Any  account,  however  brief,  of  the  educational  work  of  the 
early  settlers  in  the  Ohio  Valley  would  be  incomplete  without 
some  reference  to  the  founding  of  Miami  University,  the  second 
higher  institution  of  learning  endowed  by  national  land  grants. 

The  story  of  the  John  Cleve  Symmes  Purchase  has  already 
been  related.  After  seven  years  filled  with  confusion  and  mis- 
understandings concerning  this  purchase  an  agreement  between 
Congress  and  Symmes  was  finally  reached.  Letters  Patent,  is- 
sued September  30,  1794,  granting  to  Symmes  and  his  associates 
"all  of  the  Great  Miami  river  and  extending  from  thence  along  the 
river  Ohio,  to  the  mouth  of  the  Little  Miami  river,  and  bounded  on 
the  south  by  the  said  river  Ohio,  on  the  west  by  the  Great  Miami 
river,  on  the  east  by  the  said  Little  Miami  river,  and  on  the  North 
by  a  parallel  of  latitude  so  as  to  comprehend  the  quantity  of  three 
hundred  and  eighty- two  acres  of  land  with  the  appurtenances."^^ 

The  reservation  concerning  education  in  this  grant  reads  as 
follows:  "It  is  hereby  declared  that  one  complete  township  or 

2°  Transylvania  University  was  the  first  college  founded  west  of  the  Alle- 
ghany mountains.  It  was  an  outgrowth  of  the  following  act  of  the  Virginia 
General  Assembly  in  1780:  "Whereas  it  is  represented  to  the  general  assembly, 
that  certain  lands  within  the  county  of  Kentuckey  formerly  belonging  to  British 
subjects,  not  yet  sold  under  the  law  of  escheats  and  forfeitures,  which  might  at 
a  future  day  be  a  valuable  fund  for  the  maintenance  and  education  of  youth, 
and  it  being  the  interest  of  this  commonwealth  always  to  encourage  every 
design  which  may  tend  to  the  improvement  of  the  mind  and  the  diffusion  of 
useful  knowledge,  even  among  its  most  remote  citizens,  whose  situation  a 
barbarous  neighborhood  and  a  savage  intercourse  might  otherwise  render  un- 
friendly to  science :  Be  it  therefore  enacted.  That  eight  thousand  acres  of  land, 
within  the  said  county  of  Kentuckey,  late  the  property  of  Robert  McKenzie, 
Henry  Collins,  and  Alexander  McKie,  be  and  the  same  are  hereby  vested  in 
William  Fleming,  William  Christian,  John  Todd,  Stephen  Trigg,  Benjamin 
Logan,  John  Floyd,  John  May,  Levi  Todd,  John  Cowan,  George  Meriwether, 
John  Cobbs,  George  Thomson,  and  Edmund  Taylor,  trustees,  as  a  free  donation 
from  this  commonwealth  for  the  purpose  of  a  publick  school,  or  a  seminary  of 
learning,  to  be  erected  within  the  said  county  as  soon  as  the  circumstances  of 
the  county  and  the  state  of  its  funds  will  admit,  and  for  no  other  use  or  purpose 
whatsoever:  Saving  and  reserving  to  the  said  Robert  McKenzie,  Henry  Collins, 
Alexander  McKie,  and  every  of  them,  and  all  and  every  person  or  persons 
claiming  under  them,  or  either  of  them,  all  right  and  interest  to  the  above 
mentioned  lands,  or  any  part  thereof  to  which  they  may  be  by  law  entitled,  and 
of  which  they  shall  in  due  time  avail  themselves,  any  thing  herein  contained 
to  the  contrary  notwithstanding."     Hening:  Statutes  at  Large,  X,  pp.  287-88. 

Transylvania  Seminary  was  established  near  Danville,  Kentucky,  in  1785, 
was  removed  to  Lexington  in  1788,  and  rechartered  as  Transylvania  Univer- 
sity in  1798,  at  which  time  it  was  merged  with  the  Kentucky  Academy.  Ven- 
able:  Literary  Culture  in  the  Ohio  Valley,  pp.  164-65. 

'^Upham:  "The  Centennial  of  Miami  University"  in  Ohio  Arch,  and  Hist. 
Soc.  Publ.,  XVHI,  p.  325.    Am.  St.  Pap.  Pub.  Lands,  I. 


The  Educational  Work  of  the  Early  Settlers  79 

tract  of  land,  of  six  miles  square,  to  be  located  with  the  approba- 
tion of  the  governor,  for  the  time  being,  of  the  territory  northwest 
of  the  River  Ohio,  and  in  the  manner  and  within  the  term  of  five 
years  aforesaid,  as  nearly  as  may  be,  in  the  center  of  the  tract  of 
land  hereinbefore  granted,  hath  been  and  is  granted  and  shall  be 
holden  in  trust  to  and  for  the  sole  and  for  the  exclusive  intent  and 
purpose  of  erecting  and  establishing  therein  an  academy  and  other 
public  schools  and  seminaries  of  learning,  and  endowing  and  sup- 
porting the  same,  and  to  and  for  no  other  use,  intent  or  purpose 
whatever."  ^2 

It  is  evident  from  this  language  that  the  intention  was  to  dedi- 
cate one  township  within  the  Symmes  purchase  to  public  educa- 
tion and  to  safeguard  against  its  misuse  for  any  other  purpose. 
It  is  worthy  of  note,  however,  that  this  grant  was  not  confined  to 
higher  education,  but  permitted  the  establishment  of  schools  of 
any  and  every  grade.  It  was  generally  held  to  be  a  grant  for 
higher  education  and  was  used  for  that  purpose. 

Because  of  the  confusion  in  the  sales  of  land  under  the  terms  of 
the  original  contract  between  Symmes  and  the  government  no 
township  in  one  body  was  available  within  the  bounds  described 
in  the  grant  of  September  30,  1794.  As  a  consequence,  the  prob- 
lem of  locating  a  township  that  did  not  exist  went  unsolved  for 
several  years.  Finally,  after  Ohio  entered  the  Union,  a  township 
was  located  in  the  District  of  Cincinnati  outside  the  bounds  of  the 
original  Symmes  tract.^^  Congress  authorized  this  procedure  in 
an  act  which  modified  the  enabling  act  for  the  admission  of  Ohio 
as  a  state  into  the  Union  .^'^  The  location  of  the  university  was 
postponed,  probably  to  see  if  any  opposition  developed  to  the  loca- 
tion of  the  township  for  education  outside  the  bounds  of  the 
Symmes  purchase. 

In  1809  the  legislature  decided  to  take  up  the  question  again. 
An  act  was  passed  creating  Miami  University,  but  the  legislature 
did  not  undertake  to  fix  the  location  of  this  institution.  A  com- 
mission was  appointed  and  instructed  to  select  a  location  "in  such 
part  of  the  John  Cleve  Symmes  Purchase  as  an  eligible  place  can 
be  found."  ^^    One  of  the  commissioners  failed  to  act  and  the  other 


^^  Am.  St.  Pap.  Pub.  Lands,  I,  p.  67.     The  provision  is  the  same  as  in  the  orig- 
inal contract  with  Symmes  of  1787. 

33  Ohio  Arch,  and  Hist.  Soc.  Publ.,  XVIII,  p.  327. 

3*  Knight  and  Commons:  History  cf  Higher  Education  in  Ohio,  p.  30. 

»  Ohio  Arch,  and  Hist.  Soc.  Publ.,  XVIII,  p.  328. 


8o    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

two  proceeded  to  carry  out  the  instructions  of  the  legislature. 
They  finally  agreed  upon  Lebanon  as  the  place  for  the  establish- 
ment of  the  university.  The  legislature  at  its  next  session,  re- 
jected the  work  of  this  commission  and  fixed  the  location  of  the 
university  at  Oxford.  There  was  considerable  criticism  of  this 
act  of  the  legislature,  doubtless  due  to  disappointment  on  the 
part  of  the  towns  that  had  hoped  to  be  chosen  as  the  home  of  the 
university.  Cincinnati  was  especially  active  in  opposition  to  the 
decision  of  the  legislature  and  tried  for  a  number  of  years  to  have 
the  university  removed  from  Oxford. 

The  political  bickering  which  attended  the  founding  of  Miami 
University  seriously  retarded  its  growth.  Many  were  indifferent 
on  the  question  of  higher  education  and  some  were  in  active  op- 
position to  the  university.  The  divided  sentiment  and  personal 
feeling  that  had  been  engendered  during  the  controversy  over  the 
selection  of  a  location  made  it  very  difficult  to  get  financial  sup- 
port for  the  university  in  Ohio.  The  friends  of  the  college  sent  an 
agent  back  to  New  England  and  through  the  Atlantic  coast  states 
to  solicit  funds,  but  he  met  with  little  success.  The  first  building 
of  the  university  was  a  log  house  costing  one  hundred  fifty  dollars, 
in  which  a  grammar  school  was  opened  in  1816.  It  was  not  until 
1824  that  the  work  of  the  university  was  raised  to  collegiate  rank. 

From  one  point  of  view  the  work  for  education  of  the  early 
settlers  seems  very  small  and  inefifectual.  The  high  hopes  of  the 
promoters  of  the  Ohio  Company  of  Associates  for  the  immediate 
establishment  of  a  great  university  in  the  wilderness  fell  far  short 
of  accomplishment.  A  quarter  of  a  century  went  by  before  there 
was  a  graduate  from  a  college  in  the  Northwest.  But  in  the  light 
of  the  difificulties  these  pioneers  of  learning  had  to  surmount  their 
work  appears  heroic.  The  frontiersmen  of  the  better  class  were 
generally  friends  of  education  who  labored  patiently  and  well  for 
the  cause  of  learning.  The  obvious  and  most  important  asset 
available  for  the  support  of  schools  was  the  school  lands.  The 
task  of  converting  virgin  soil  into  common  schools  and  colleges  was 
by  no  means  a  small  undertaking,  nevertheless  the  early  settlers 
in  the  Ohio  valley  attacked  the  problem  with  the  enthusiasm  and 
persistence  so  characteristic  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  pioneer  and 
blazed  the  trail  for  future  educational  progress. 

In  the  earliest  years  of  settlement,  when  the  need  of  government 
aid  was  greatest,  the  land  grants  for  education  were  of  least  value. 


The  Educational  Work  of  the  Early  Settlers  8 1 

It  took  years  to  develop  these  lands  to  the  point  where  they  could 
produce  very  much  revenue  and  in  no  event  were  the  funds  thus 
derived  sufficient  to  maintain  public  schools.  The  customary 
tuition  fees  did  little  to  improve  education  and  were  wholly  in- 
adequate in  so  far  as  higher  education  was  concerned.  Private 
subscriptions  were  the  chief  means  available  for  support  of  col- 
leges and  academies  and  raising  endowments  was  no  easier  then 
than  now.  The  principle  and  policy  of  supporting  education  by 
taxation  was  unknown  on  the  frontier.  The  back-woods  educa- 
tors were  guided  by  the  educational  theories  and  traditions  of  the 
eastern  states  which  were  frequently  ill-adapted  to  frontier  condi- 
tions. But  notwithstanding  all  the  hindrances  that  retarded  the 
progress  of  education,  it  certainly  kept  pace  with  the  general 
development  of  the  frontier.  The  early  settlers  made  good  use  of 
the  resources  they  had  at  their  command  for  founding  schools 
and,  while  they  developed  no  new  theories  of  public  education, 
they  kept  alive  the  zeal  for  learning  and  created  precedents  in  the 
management  and  control  of  public  schools  that  have  had  a  far- 
reaching  influence  upon  subsequent  educational  theory  and  prac- 
tice in  the  United  States. 


CHAPTER  VIII 

MANAGEMENT  OF  SCHOOL  LANDS  AND  FUNDS 

IN  THE  NORTHWEST 

It  does  not  come  within  the  scope  of  this  work  to  treat  at  length 
the  question  of  the  management  of  school  lands  and  funds  in  the 
Northwest.  That  phase  of  the  history  of  national  land  grants  has 
been  so  admirably  presented  by  others  that  nothing  of  value  could 
be  added  here.^  However,  in  order  to  show  the  full  significance  of 
the  national  land  grants  for  education  it  is  necessary  to  present  a 
few  facts  as  regards  the  various  policies  that  developed  for  the 
management  of  these  lands. 

In  general,  the  national  government  surrendered  the  manage- 
ment of  school  lands  to  state  or  local  authorities.  The  chief  con- 
trol exercised  by  the  national  government  was  through  the  terms 
of  the  original  grants.  By  this  means  Congress  determined  in 
each  case  into  whose  hands  the  management  of  school  lands  should 
be  committed.  The  act  enabling  Ohio  to  become  a  state,  passed 
April  30,  1802,  provided  "that  section  number  sixteen  in  every 
township,  and  where  such  section  has  been  sold,  granted  or  dis- 
posed of,  other  lands  equivalent  thereto  and  most  contiguous  to 
the  same,  shall  be  granted  to  the  inhabitants  of  such  township,  for 
the  use  of  schools."  ^  By  this  act  control  was  vested  in  the  in- 
habitants of  each  township.  The  next  year,  after  pressure  had 
been  brought  to  bear  from  Ohio,  a  supplementary  act  was  passed 
by  Congress,  March  3,  1803,  which  set  forth  in  detail  certain 
quarter  townships  in  the  United  States  Military  Reserve  and  in 
the  Connecticut  Reserve  and  one  thirty-sixth  of  the  Virginia 
Military  Reserve  and  of  any  Indian  lands  thereafter  purchased 
that  should  to  be  used  for  schools.^  This  act  also  reserved  one 
township  in  the  Cincinnati  District  for  a  university.^  Subse- 
quently, on  March  2,  1807,  Congress  set  aside  eighteen  quarter 

1  Knight  presents  an  exhaustive  study  of  this  question  in  his  History  and 
Management  of  Land  Grants  for  Education  in  the  Northwest  Territory.  Ac- 
knowledgment is  here  made  of  the  great  assistance  his  work  has  been  in  con- 
nection with  this  chapter. 

2  U.  S.  Statutes  at  Large,  II,  p.  173;  also  in  U.  S.  Land  Laws,  I,  p.  85. 

3  U.  S.  Land  Laws,  I,  p.  88. 

*  Miami  University  was  founded  on  this  grant. 

82 


Management  of  School  Lands  in  the  Northwest  83 

townships  and  three  sections  in  the  Virginia  Military  Reserve  in 
lieu  of  the  thirty-sixth  part  of  the  whole  Reserve  which  had  been 
donated  for  education.^  The  management  of  this  tract  was 
placed  in  the  hands  of  the  state  authorities. 

After  these  land  grants  for  education  were  made  the  national 
government  refrained  from  exercising  any  control  over  their 
management  so  long  as  the  terms  upon  which  the  lands  were  given 
were  observed.  This  became  the  established  policy  and  on  few 
occasions  has  Congress  attempted  either  directly  or  indirectly  to 
exercise  control  over  land  grants  for  education  or  the  funds  de- 
rived therefrom.  Only  in  cases  of  gross  mismanagement  and 
violation  of  the  terms  upon  which  the  donations  were  made  has 
Congress  undertaken  to  interfere,  and  then  with  ill  success.  A 
case  in  point  is  the  attempt  on  the  part  of  Congress  to  compel  the 
Illinois  Legislature  to  comply  with  the  terms  upon  which  the 
"three  per  cent  fund"  was  granted.^  After  several  years *of 
controversy  between  the  state  of  Illinois  and  the  national  govern- 
ment Congress  practically  surrendered  the  right  to  exercise  any 
supervision  of  school  lands  or  funds  by  the  repeal  of  the  law  which 
required  an  accounting  by  the  state  to  the  Secretary  of  the 
Treasury.'^  However,  Illinois  thenceforth  applied  the  fund  to 
education. 

While  the  influence  of  the  national  government  upon  the 
management  of  land  grants  for  education  was  exerted  indirectly 
through  the  acts  of  Congress  which  designated  where  the  author- 
ity for  the  management  of  these  grants  should  be  placed,  by  the 
time  the  Northwest  Territory  was  organized  into  states  three  dis- 
tinct plans  of  management  had  been  tried  by  Congress  and  a  def- 
inite policy  developed.  The  first  plan  was  that  set  forth  in  the 
act  enabling  Ohio  to  become  a  state  by  which  the  land  grants  for 
education  in  each  township  were  made  directly  to  the  inhabitants 
of  the  township.  Congress  made  no  provisions  for  the  manage- 
ment of  these.  The  first  constitution  of  Ohio  stipulated  that 
"religion,  morality,  and  knowledge,  being  essentially  necessary 
to  good  government  and  the  happiness  of  mankind,  schools  and 

^  U.  S.  Land  Laws,  I,  p.  148. 

•  U.  S.  Statutes  at  Large,  III,  p.  430.  When  Illinois  came  into  the  Union 
Congress  provided  that  three  per  cent  of  the  revenue  derived  from  the  sale  of 
public  lands  in  Illinois  should  be  donated  to  the  state  for  education.  The 
legislature  diverted  this  fund  to  other  uses.  See  Knight:  Land  Grants  for 
Education,  pp.  82-85. 

'  U.  S.  Statutes  at  Large,  IV,  p.  431-32. 


84    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

the  means  of  instruction  shall  forever  be  encouraged  by  legislative 
provision."^  Thus  the  school  lands  were  given  by  Congress  to  the 
inhabitants  of  each  township  for  the  encouragement  of  education 
within  the  township,  but  the  general  control  of  education  was 
placed  in  the  hands  of  the  state  legislature  by  the  state  constitu- 
tion. As  a  matter  of  practice  the  legislature  passed  laws  fixing 
the  general  policy  for  the  management  of  the  school  lands,  but 
turned  over  the  actual  management  of  the  lands  to  the  townships. 

In  1804  Congress  created  the  land  districts  of  Vincennes,  Kas- 
kaskia,  and  Detroit  and  reserved  section  sixteen  in  each  township 
for  education  and  one  township  in  each  land  district  for  a  "semi- 
nary of  learning."^  The  title  of  these  lands  remained  in  the  na- 
tional government.  When  Indiana  was  admitted  to  the  Union  in 
1816  Congress  followed  the  precedent  established  in  the  admis- 
sion of  Ohio  and  gave  every  section  sixteen  to  the  inhabitants  of 
the  township  in  which  it  was  located  and  gave  the  seminary 
township  to  the  state. ^^  Two  years  later,  upon  the  admission  of 
Illinois  to  the  Union,  Congress  adopted  the  second  plan  for  dealing 
with  the  control  of  school  land  grants.  By  the  act  enabling  Il- 
linois to  become  a  state  Congress  granted  section  sixteen  in  every 
township  to  the  state,  for  the  use  of  the  inhabitants  of  such  town- 
ship, for  the  use  of  schools.^^ 

The  difference  between  this  plan  and  the  first  is  in  the  fact  that 
the  school  lands  were  not  granted  to  the  inhabitants  of  each 
township  but  to  the  state.  The  principle  of  using  every  section 
sixteen  for  schools  for  the  benefit  of  the  inhabitants  of  the  town- 
ship in  which  the  section  was  located  was  retained,  however.  In 
Ohio  and  Indiana  the  management  of  the  school  lands  was  left  to 
the  township;  in  Illinois  the  management  was  in  the  hands  of  the 
legislature.  In  all  three  states  the  funds  derived  from  the  section 
sixteen  in  any  township  had  to  be  used  for  school  purposes  within 
that  township,  so  in  practice  there  was  very  little  difference  be- 
tween the  first  plan  and  the  second.  This  second  plan  was  im- 
portant because  it  made  easy  the  transition  from  the  early  plan 
of  township  control  of  school  lands  to  the  final  policy  that  was 
developed. 

8  Constitution  of  Ohio,  Art.  VIII,  Sec.  3.  In  Chase:  Statutes  of  Ohio,'  I,  p 
82. 

»  U.  S.  Statutes  at  Large,  II,  pp.  277-83. 
^^Ibid.,  Ill,  pp.  289-91. 
"mVi.,  Ill,  p.  430. 


Management  of  School  Lands  in  the  Northwest  85 

In  1826  Congress  set  aside  two  townships  or  their  equivalent  in 
the  Territory  of  Michigan  for  the  use  of  a  university  within  the 
territory. ^2  After  a  long  and  heated  controversy  with  Congress 
Michigan  came  into  the  Union  in  1836.^^  The  enabling  act  which 
was  finally  accepted  by  the  territory  contained  two  important 
provisions  concerning  education.  By  this  act  section  sixteen  in 
every  township  was  **  granted  to  the  State  for  the  use  of  schools." 
The  act  further  provided  * '  that  the  seventy-two  sections  of  land 
set  apart  and  reserved  for  the  use  and  support  of  a  university  by 
an  act  of  Congress  approved  on  the  twentieth  day  of  May,  eight- 
een hundred  and  twenty-six,  entitled  '  an  act  concerning  a  semi- 
nary of  learning  in  the  Territory  of  Michigan,'  are  hereby  granted 
and  conveyed  to  the  State,  to  be  appropriated  solely  to  the  use  and 
support  of  such  university  in  such  manner  as  the  Legislature 
may  prescribe."  ^^ 

The  provision  concerning  university  lands  does  not  differ 
materially  from  the  policy  followed  in  the  case  of  the  states  pre- 
viously formed  in  the  Northwest,  but  the  provision  as  regards  the 
sections  sixteen  marked  the  beginning  of  a  new  and  distinct  policy 
of  the  national  government.  Not  only  was  the  title  to  these  lands 
vested  in  the  state,  but  the  state  was  relieved  of  the  necessity 
of  using  each  section  sixteen  for  schools  within  the  township  in 
which  the  section  was  located.  This  change  created  a  state  com- 
mon school  fund  that  could  be  used  to  build  up  a  state  school 
system.  The  burden  of  New  England  local  self-government  was 
removed,  in  part  at  least,  from  common  school  education  and  the 
state  legislature  was  free  to  make  the  most  of  the  Congressional 
land  grants  for  educatiQn. 

The  act  enabling  Wisconsin  to  become  a  state,  approved  August 
6,  1846,1^  contained  provisions  concerning  education  similar  to 
those  in  the  enabling  act  for  Michigan.  At  that  time  the  plan 
embodied  in  these  provisions  had  become  the  established  policy  of 
Congress.  In  theory  this  centralization  of  the  management  and 
control  of  school  lands  in  the  hands  of  the  state  legislature  was  a 
great  improvement  over  the  early  decentralized  plan  of  township 
control  which  was  applied  in  Ohio  and  Indiana.     In  practice  the 

»2  U.  S.  Statutes  at  Large,  IV,  p.  180. 

"  For  a  full  treatment  of  this  controversy  see  Utley  and  Cutheon:  Michigatif 
As  a  Province,  Territory  and  State,  II  and  III. 
"  U.  S.  Statutes  at  Large,  V,  pp.  59-60. 
^  Ibid.,  IX,  pp.  56-58. 


86    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

results  were  not  all  that  could  be  hoped  for  or  expected.  After 
all,  it  was  not  so  much  a  question  of  who  should  manage  the  school 
lands  but  how  they  should  be  managed  to  fulfil  the  purpose  for 
which  these  grants  were  made. 

In  each  of  the  territories  or  states  in  the  old  Northwest  two 
general  plans  of  management  of  school  lands  were  followed.  la 
each  case  the  policy  of  leasing  the  lands  was  first  pursued,  only  to 
be  discarded  later  to  make  way  for  the  policy  of  selling  the  lands. 
At  first  glance  it  would  appear  strange  that  the  newer  states 
learned  so  little  from  the  experiences  of  their  neighbors.  Two 
facts  explain  this.  First,  the  states  passed  through  much  the 
same  process  of  development,  and  in  the  early  period  of  growth 
leasing  seemed  to  meet  the  needs  of  the  time  better  than  any  other 
plan,  while  later  it  seemed  advisable  to  sell  the  lands  to  meet  the 
changed  needs.  Secondly,  all  five  of  the  states  in  the  Northwest 
developed  so  nearly  contemporaneously  within  such  a  relatively 
short  time  that  it  was  impossible  to  discern  at  such  close  range  the 
inherent  strength  or  weakness  in  the  policy  of  leasing  or  to  foresee 
the  evils  which  were  to  grow  out  of  the  policy  of  selling  school 
lands.  A  brief  sketch  of  the  workings  of  these  two  policies  will 
assist  in  bringing  out  the  significance  of  the  land  grants  for  educa- 
tion. 

The  leasing  system  was  first  tried  in  Ohio  shortly  after  that 
state  was  admitted  to  the  Union,  thereby  gaining  title  to  the  lands 
reserved  for  education  lying  within  her  borders.  By  an  act 
passed  April  15,  1803,  the  legislature  provided  the  lands  granted 
for  the  support  of  schools  in  the  several  parts  of  the  state  should 
"be  let  on  lease  for  the  purpose  of  improving  the  same  and  thereby 
rendering  them  productive,  that  the  profits  arising  therefrom  may 
be  applied  to  the  support  of  schools,  according  to  the  true  intent 
and  meaning  of  the  original  donation."  ^^  Under  the  terms  of  this 
act  the  school  lands  lying  in  the  United  States  Military  Reserve 
were  to  be  leased  for  any  term  of  years,  not  exceeding  fifteen,  and 
the  sections  number  sixteen,  not  already  leased,  in  all  other  parts 
of  the  state  were  to  be  leased  for  any  term  not  exceeding  seven 
years.  The  lessee  was  required  to  clear  and  fence  thirty  acres  in 
every  one  hundred  and  sixty  acre  tract,  plant  crops  and  set  out  a 
small  orchard.  The  management  of  these  lands  was  placed  in  the 
hands  of  local  agents,  appointed  by  the  governor,  for  each  county 

"  Chase:  Statutes  of  Ohio,  I,  p.  361-62. 


Management  of  School  Lands  in  the  Northwest  87 

or  district.  The  legislature  further  stipulated  in  this  act  that  it 
was  the  "special  duty  of  the  said  agent,  to  inspect  and  inquire  into 
any  waste  or  trespass"  that  might  be  committed  on  the  school 
lands  and  to  prosecute  the  offenders. 

It  is  evident  that  the  purpose  of  this  act  was  not  to  produce 
revenue  for  schools  but  to  improve  the  school  lands.  This  was 
probably  as  wise  a  policy  as  could  have  been  followed  at  the  time, 
but  it  failed  to  accomplish  its  purpose.  The  United  States  was 
offering  an  abundance  of  good  land  for  sale  on  long  time  credit  so 
there  was  no  particular  reason  for  a  person  obligating  himself  for  a 
term  of  years  to  clear  and  improve  school  lands  with  no  prospect 
of  being  allowed  to  buy  the  land.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  very  little 
land  was  leased  under  this  plan  and  it  was  abandoned  at  the  end  of 
two  years. 

On  Feburary  20,  1805,  the  Ohio  legislature  turned  over  to  the 
township  trustees  the  management  of  sections  sixteen  and  ordered 
the  trustees  to  lease  that  section  in  tracts  of  not  less  than  eighty  or 
more  than  two  hundred  acres  "to  those  who  make  the  most  ad- 
vantageous proposals,"  for  a  period  not  longer  than  fifteen  years.^'' 
The  trustees  were  given  authority  to  require  the  lessee  to  make 
whatever  improvements  they  deemed  proper.  This  more  liberal 
policy  of  leasing  increased  the  number  of  tenants,  but  on  such 
terms  as  to  produce  little  or  no  revenue  for  schools  and  not  much 
improvement  to  the  school  lands.  The  competition  with  the 
cheap  lands  of  the  national  government  would  have  worked 
against  any  policy  of  leasing  that  would  have  been  in  harmony 
with  the  purpose  for  which  the  school  lands  were  given. 

In  dealing  with  the  school  lands  within  the  Virginia  Military 
Reserve  the  Ohio  Legislature  adopted  a  new  policy  which  marked 
the  beginning  of  the  transition  from  the  system  of  leasing  to  the 
policy  of  selling  school  lands.  On  February  17,  1809,  the  legisla- 
ture enacted  a  law  which  created  the  offices  of  surveyor,  register, 
and  treasurer.^^  The  surveyor  was  ordered  to  run  off  all  of  the 
quarter-sections  reserved  for  school  purposes  within  the  Virginia 
Military  Reserve.  The  register  and  treasurer  were  instructed  to 
advertise  and  offer  for  sale  to  the  highest  bidder,  at  public  auction, 
all  of  these  school  lands  by  quarter-sections.  The  minimum  price 
was  fixed  at  two  dollars  an  acre  and  the  proportionate  part  of 


"  Chase:  Statutes  of  Ohio,  T,  p.  507. 
"  Ibid.,  pp.  620-22. 


88    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

the  expense  of  surveying,  advertising  and  offering  the  lands  for 
sale. 

The  conditions  of  sale,  as  set  forth  in  the  act,  were  as  follows: 
"There  shall  be  paid  to  the  treasurer,  at  the  time  of  making  the 
purchase,  such  sum  as  may  be  found  chargeable  on  each  quarter- 
section,  for  the  expense  of  surveying,  advertising  and  offering  for 
sale  as  aforesaid;  and  on  the  remaining  sum,  the  purchaser,  his 
heirs  or  assigns,  shall  pay  yearly  and  every  year,  forever,  at  the 
rate  of  six  per  centum  per  year;  subject,  however,  to  alteration  by 
any  succeeding  legislature,  so  as  to  enable  the  purchaser  or  pur- 
chasers to  make  such  commutation  as  said  legislature  may  think 
expedient."  ^^ 

The  act  further  provided  that  the  register  should  "execute 
deeds  of  lease  for  ninety-nine  years,  renewable  forever,"  upon  the 
fulfilment  of  the  conditions  of  the  sale.  While  the  title  to  the 
land  remained  in  State  of  Ohio  the  lease  in  perpetuity  authorized 
by  this  act  was  virtually  a  sale.  Thousands  of  acres  were  leased 
on  these  terms,  creating  revenue  for  education  at  the  rate  of 
twelve  cents  an  acre! 

The  injustice  and  utter  folly  of  such  law  became  apparent  even 
to  the  state  legislature,  so  in  1816  a  new  law  was  enacted  that  pro- 
vided that  the  lands  should  be  leased  for  ninety-nine  years,  re- 
newable forever,  at  a  rental  of  six  per  cent  of  the  appraised  value 
with  the  additional  provision  that  the  lands  should  be  revalued  in 
1835  and  every  twenty  years  thereafter .^^^  The  next  year,  Janu- 
ary 27,  181 7,  this  plan  was  applied  to  all  the  sections  sixteen.  In 
this  case  the  rental  was  to  be  six  per  cent  on  the  appraised  value 
of  the  lands,  with  a  revaluation  every  thirty-three  years.^^ 

The  precedent  for  this  form  of  lease  had  been  set  by  the  trustees 
of  Ohio  University  in  1804.  Acting  under  the  instruction  of  the 
legislature  the  trustees  granted  leases  of  the  university  lands  for 
ninety-nine  years,  renewable  forever,  at  a  rental  of  six  per  cent  of 
the  appraised  value,  with  the  provision  that  the  lands  should  be 
revalued  every  thirty-five  years.  The  next  year,  1805,  a  sup- 
plementary act  was  passed  which  did  not  contain  the  provision 
concerning  revaluation  every  thirty-five  years.  When  the  time 
came  for  the  first  revaluation,  the  lessees  contended  that  the  act  of 


"  Chase:  I,  p.  621. 
^^Ibid.,  II,  pp.  993-95- 
^^Ibid.,  pp.  1026-30. 


Management  of  School  Lands  in  the  Northwest  89 

1805  had  repealed  the  act  providing  for  revaluations.  The 
Supreme  Court  decided  a  test  case  in  favor  of  the  university,  up- 
holding the  right  to  increase  the  rent  on  the  basis  of  revaluation. 
The  lessees  appealed  to  the  legislature  and  that  body  declared  it 
had  been  the  intent  of  the  law  of  1805  to  repeal  the  provision  con- 
cerning revaluations  and  forbade  the  trustees  of  the  university  to 
collect  higher  rent.  As  a  result  of  this  act  the  university  now 
receives  less  than  five  thousand  dollars  rent  from  landsworth  more 
than  a  million  doUars.^^  In  1810  the  legislature  practically  de- 
stroyed the  value  of  the  land  grants  for  a  seminary  in  the  John 
Cleve  Symmes  purchase  by  an  act  which  provided  for  perpetual 
leases  without  revaluations. 

In  spite  of  the  fact  that  the  lessees  of  the  lands  of  Ohio  Univer- 
sity eventually  succeeded  in  evading  the  just  provisions  of  the  law 
of  1804,  the  plan  of  leasing  established  by  that  law,  and  which  was 
later  applied  to  all  the  sections  sixteen  by  the  law  of  181 7,  showed 
promise  of  producing  some  revenue,  at  least,  for  education.  This 
promise  was  never  fulfilled  in  fact  for  there  was  little  increase  in 
the  actual  income  from  the  school  lands.  Finally,  in  disgust 
with  the  whole  plan  of  leasing,  the  Ohio  legislature  followed  the 
advice  of  a  commission,  previously  appointed  to  investigate  the 
whole  question  of  school  lands,  and  petitioned  Congress,  in  1824, 
for  permission  to  sell  the  school  lands. ^^  The  petition  was 
granted  and  thus  ended  the  system  of  leasing  school  lands  in  Ohio. 

The  history  of  the  system  of  leasing  in  the  other  states  of  the 
old  Northwest  is  very  similar  to  that  of  Ohio,  though  by  no  means 
as  extensive.  Next,  both  in  time  and  in  importance,  is  the  history 
of  leasing  in  Indiana.  In  1808  the  territorial  legislature  of  In- 
diana gave  the  Courts  of  Common  Pleas  the  authority  to  lease 
school  lands  in  the  various  counties  for  a  period  of  not  more  than 
five  years.  The  lessee  was  required  to  clear  ten  acres  of  each 
quarter-section  held  under  lease.^^  In  18 10  the  legislature  gave 
the  courts  power  to  lease  the  lands  on  whatever  terms  seemed 
advisable,  and  the  revenue  derived  from  such  leases  was  to  be 
used  for  the  support  of  common  schools  according  to  the  true 
intent  of  the  Act  of  Congress.^^ 

22  For  a  detailed  account  of  the  leasing  of  the  university  lands  see  The  History 
of  Higher  Education  in  Ohio  or  Knight:  Land  Grants  for  Education. 

23  Am.  St.  Pap.  Pub.  Lands,  IV,  p.  47. 

2*  Knight:  Land  Grants  for  Education,  p.  64. 
26  Indiana  Territorial  Laws,  18 10,  p.  46,  47. 


90    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

At  the  time  of  this  legislation  Indiana  was  not  a  state  and  the 
title  to  the  school  lands  was  vested  in  the  national  government. 
As  has  been  pointed  out  the  act  enabling  Indiana  to  become  a  state 
gave  the  school  lands  within  each  township  to  the  inhabitants  of 
the  township.2«  The  state  legislature,  therefore,  had  only  general 
supervision  of  the  management  of  the  school  lands,  except  those 
granted  for  a  university.  The  first  constitution  of  Indiana  pro- 
hibited the  sale  of  school  lands  before  the  year  1820.^^  The  first 
state  legislature  passed  an  act  which  provided  for  the  appointment 
of  a  superintendent  in  each  township  whose  business  it  was  to 
manage  the  section  sixteen.  He  was  authorized  to  lease  school 
lands  **to  the  best  advantage,  for  not  more  than  seven  years."  ^^ 
Cleared  lands  were  to  be  leased  for  only  three  years.  The  next 
year  the  legislature  changed  the  terms  of  these  leases  to  nine 
years. 2^ 

The  policy  of  permitting  the  township  trustees  to  fix  the  condi- 
tions on  which  school  lands  were  leased  was  largely  expanded  by 
an  act  of  the  legislature,  in  1824,  which  gave  to  the  trustees  of  in- 
corporated congressional  townships  the  power  to  dispose  of  school 
lands  "in  such  manner  as  may  seem  most  conducive  to  the  best 
interests"  of  the  schools,  with  the  restriction  that  no  lands  should 
be  sold.^°  Thus,  in  trying  to  make  effective  the  purpose  of  Con- 
gress in  granting  the  school  lands  to  the  inhabitants  of  each  town- 
ship, the  Indiana  legislature  opened  the  way,  by  this  law  of  1824, 
for  as  many  systems  of  leasing  as  there  were  townships  within  the 
state.  In  fact  lands  were  leased  on  almost  every  conceivable 
terms  and,  in  some  cases,  on  terms  so  absurd  as  to  be  almost  be- 
yond conception. 

The  legislature  very  soon  saw  the  folly  of  this  policy  of  grant- 
ing such  general  powers  to  the  township  trustees,  so  the  following 
year,  February  12,  1825,  an  act  amending  the  law  of  1824  was 
passed  which  limited  the  term  of  school  leases  to  ten  years. ^^  No 
other  restrictions  or  safeguards  were  placed  upon  the  leases 
and,  as  a  consequence,  waste  and  mismanagement  continued  un- 
checked.    By  1827  Indiana  had  become  so  discouraged  by  the 

26  U.  S.  Statutes  at  Large,  III,  p.  289. 

27  Constitution  of  Indiana,  Art.  IX,  Sec.  I,  Adopted  1816,  in  Revised  Laws  of 
Indiana,  1824,  p.  48. 

28  Knight:  Land  Grants  for  Education,  p.  65. 

29  Laws  of  Indiana,  18 18,  p.  302. 

«"  Revised  Laws  of  Indiana,  1824,  pp.  380-81. 
"  Laws  of  Indiana,  1825,  p.  93. 


Management  of  School  Lands  in  the  Northwest  91 

results  of  leasing  that  the  legislature  determined  to  follow  the 
example  of  Ohio  and  petition  Congress  for  authority  to  sell  the 
school  lands.     This  petition  was  granted  by  Congress  in  1828.'^ 

In  Illinois  the  policy  of  leasing  school  lands  was  short-lived. 
Nothing  was  done  with  the  school  lands  until  after  the  admission 
of  Illinois  into  the  Union.  The  first  legislature,  in  18 19,  instructed 
the  county  commissioners  in  each  county  to  appoint  three  trustees 
for  each  township  who  should  sub-divide  and  lease  the  section  six- 
teen for  a  period  of  ten  years  on  the  best  possible  terms. ^^  This 
plan  was  continued  with  only  slight  modification  until  1831  when 
the  legislature,  without  waiting  for  the  consent  of  Congress,  which 
had  been  sought  in  1829,  authorized  the  sale  of  school  lands.^^ 

In  Michigan  nothing  was  done  concerning  school  lands  until 
1824  when  the  territorial  legislature  petitioned  Congress  for 
authority  to  manage  them.^^  Four  years  later  Congress  vested 
this  power  in  the  governor  and  council,  with  the  restriction  that  no 
lease  should  be  granted  for  more  than  four  years. ^^  The  legisla- 
ture immediately  enacted  a  law  by  which  township  trustees  were 
authorized  to  lease  the  school  lands  for  not  more  than  three  years, 
the  revenue  to  be  applied  "towards  the  pay  of  school  teachers  in 
the  said  township.^^  In  1829  the  office  of  Superintendent  of  Com- 
mon Schools  was  created,  but  no  superintendent  was  appointed. 
Four  years  later  the  superintendent  was  authorized  to  lease  the 
school  lands  in  those  townships  that  had  no  trustees.  Under 
these  early  laws  much  of  the  school  lands  was  leased.'^ 

The  state  constitution  adopted  in  Michigan  in  1835  created  the 
office  of  State  Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction  and  provided 
that  "the  proceeds  of  all  lands  that  have  been  or  hereafter  may  be 
granted  by  the  United  States  to  this  state,  for  the  support  of 
schools,  which  shall  hereafter  be  sold  or  disposed  of  shall  be  and 
remain  a  perpetual  fund;  the  interest  of  which,  together  with  the 
rents  of  all  such  unsold  lands,  shall  be  inviolably  appropriated  to 

'2  U.  S.  Statutes  at  Large,  IV,  p.  298.  Indiana  applied  for  permission  to  sell 
the  school  lands  Feb.  27,  1827.     Am.  St.  Pap.  Pub.  Lands,  IV,  p.  664. 

33  Laws  of  Illinois,  1819,  p.  108. 

34  Laws  of  Illinois,  1830-31,  pp.  172-76.  On  Jan.  22,  1829  the  legislature  had 
authorized  the  sale  of  lands  as  soon  as  Congress  gave  consent.  Laws  of  Illinois, 
1828-29,  p.  150. 

^Am.  St.  Pap.  Pub.  Lands,  IV,  p.  510. 

^  U.  S.  Statutes  at  Large,  IV,  p.  314. 

"  Knight:  Land  Grants  for  Education,  p.  87,  quoting  Territorial  Laws,  II, 

P-  695. 

38  Knight:  p.  88. 


92    Educational  Significance  oj  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

the  support  of  schools  throughout  the  state." ^^  The  act  of  Con- 
gress which  enabled  Michigan  to  become  a  state,  passed  in  1837, 
granted  the  school  lands  to  the  state,  to  be  used  for  schools  with- 
out reference  to  townships. ^°  In  the  sarne  year  the  state  legisla- 
ture authorized  the  state  superintendent  to  sell  the  school  lands  at 
not  less  than  eight  dollars  an  acre  until  the  sales  should  total  one 
million  five  hundred  thousand  dollars.^^  By  this  first  act  con- 
cerning school  lands  the  first  state  legislature  of  Michigan  aban- 
doned, in  theory  at  least,  the  policy  of  leasing  school  lands. 

The  experience  of  Wisconsin  with  the  system  of  leasing  school 
lands  was  very  similar  to  that  of  Michigan.  In  1836  Wisconsin 
was  separated  from  Michigan  and  the  following  year  the  township 
commissioners  were  given  control  of  the  school  lands  by  an  act  of 
the  territorial  legislature.^^  Two  years  later,  1839,  a  law  was 
enacted  which  created  the  office  of  school  inspector  in  each  town- 
ship, who  was  to  lease  the  school  lands  for  a  term  of  not  more  than 
three  years.^^  In  1840  the  legislature  placed  the  control  of  the 
school  lands  back  in  the  hands  of  the  school  commissioners  of  each 
town  and  reduced  the  term  of  leases  of  school  lands  to  two  years .'^* 
The  only  other  change  made  in  the  system  of  leasing  before  Wis- 
consin became  a  state  was  made  in  1842  when  the  term  of  the 
leases  was  changed  to  four  years.^^ 

The  first  constitution  of  Wisconsin  created  a  permanent  school 
fund  of  the  revenue  derived  from  the  sections  sixteen  and  from  the 
five  hundred  thousand  acres  of  land  donated  by  Congress  for  in- 
ternal improvements  and  five  per  cent,  of  all  the  sales  of  public 
lands  within  the  state.^^  This  use  of  the  grant  of  five  hundred 
thousand  acres  for  internal  improvements  was  contrary  to  the 
terms  of  the  Congressional  grant  and,  therefore,  could  not  become 
effective  without  the  consent  of  Congress.  In  1848  Congress  ap- 
proved this  provision  of  the  state  constitution.'*^  The  state  con- 
s'Constitution  of  Michigan,  Art.  X,  Sees,  i  and  2,  adopted  in  1835.  In 
Revised  Statutes  at  Michigan,  1838,  p.  42. 

*o  U.  S.  Statutes  at  Large,  V,  pp.  59-60. 

*^Laws  of  Michigan,  1837-38,  p.  210.  This  law  also  authorized  the  sale  of 
university  lands  to  the  amount  of  $500,000,  at  a  minimum  price  of  twenty  dol- 
lars an  acre. 

*2  Knight:  p.  104. 

«  Statutes  of  the  Territory  of  Wisconsin,  1839,  p.  137. 

^  Laws  of  the  Territory  of  Wisconsin,  1 839-40,  pp.  80-84. 

*^  Ibid.,  1841-42,  p.  46. 

<°  Constitution  of  Wisconsin,  Art.  X,  Sec.  2.  Adopted  1848.  In  Revised 
Statutes  of  Wisconsin,  1849. 

«  U.  S.  Statutes  at  Large,  IX,  p.  233. 


Management  of  School  Lands  in  the  Northwest  93 

stitution  also  created  a  board  of  commissioners  composed  of  the 
Secretary  of  State,  the  Treasurer,  and  the  Attorney  General,  who 
should  manage  and  control  the  school  lands.  All  lands  were  to  be 
appraised  and  offered  for  sale  by  this  board  .''^  By  these  constitu- 
tional provisions  the  people  of  Wisconsin  determined,  before  be- 
coming a  state,  to  abandon  forever  the  policy  of  leasing  school 
lands. 

The  system  of  leasing  school  lands  was  tried  in  each  of  the  five 
states  of  the  old  Northwest  and  in  every  case  it  was  discarded  as  a 
failure.  In  Ohio  where  this  sytem  had  the  longest  trial  it  seems  to 
have  been  the  worst  failure.  Among  the  chief  difficulties  that  at- 
tended the  leasing  system  was  the  problem  of  squatters  on  school 
lands.  Caleb  Atwater,  who  was  active  in  the  political  life  of  Ohio 
at  the  time  when  that  state  abandoned  the  leasing  system,  re- 
corded concerning  squatters: 

These  occupants  made  no  very  valuable  improvements,  on  these  lands, 
but  they  contrived,  in  time,  to  obtain  various  acts  of  our  general  assembly, 
in  favor  of  such  squatters.  Such  acts  increased  in  number  every  year, 
until  they  not  only  cost  the  state,  large  sums  of  money  for  legislating 
about  them,  but  some  entire  sessions  were  almost  spent,  in  such  unprofit-- 
able  legislation. 

In  the  meantime,  scarcely  a  dollar  was  ever  paid  over  to  the  people,  for 
whose  benefit  these  lands  had  been  given,  by  Congress. 

Members  of  the  legislature,  not  unfrequently,  got  acts  passed  and^ 
leases  granted,  either  to  themselves,  to  their  relations  or,  to  their  wamu 
partisans.  One  senator  contrived  to  get,  by  such  acts,  seven  entire  sections 
of  land  into,  either  his  own  or  his  childrens'  possession  l^^ 

This  same  writer  asserts  that  the  "perverse  legislation"  con- 
cerning school  land  leases  cost  the  state  of  Ohio  at  least  one  million 
dollars  between  the  years  of  1803  and  1820.^^  This  same  pes- 
simistic historian  is  the  authority  for  the  statement  that  very  few 
people  were  opposed  to  this  policy  during  those  years.  As  por- 
trayed by  Atwater  the  evils  of  the  system  of  leasing  were  indeed 
great.  Perhaps  he,  who  lived  surrounded  by  these  evils,  lacked 
historical  perspective  in  passing  judgment  upon  the  system.  It  is 
well  to  bear  in  mind  that  Atwater  was  a  somewhat  disgruntled 
politician  who  had  spent  much  time  and  some  money  in  combat- 
ing the  evils  of  leasing,  for  which  service  he  received  scant  praise 

*•  Constitution  of  Wisconsin,  Art.  X,  Sees.  7  and  8,  adopted  1848.  In 
Revised  Statutes  of  Wisconsin,  1849. 

<»  Atwater:  A  History  of  the  State  of  Ohio,  p.  253. 
"/&«<i.,p.  253. 


94    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

or  thanks  and  little  remuneration.^^  At  best,  the  system  of  leasing 
school  lands  was  ineffective  in  producing  revenue  for  the  en- 
couragement and  support  of  education.  Whether  the  change  to 
the  system  of  sales  was  a  great  improvement  is  another  question. 

In  brief,  the  adoption  of  the  policy  of  selling  school  lands  came 
about  in  this  manner,  Ephraim  Cutler,  who  was  a  member  of  the 
Ohio  General  Assembly,  introduced  a  resolution  in  December, 
1 8 19,  for  the  appointment  of  a  committee  on  schools.  The  com- 
mittee was  appointed  and  Cutler  was  made  its  chairman.  Later 
he  introduced  a  bill  in  the  house  of  representatives  providing  for 
the  support  of  common  schools.  This  bill  passed  the  house  but 
was  lost  in  the  senate. 

In  December,  1821,  a  committee  on  schools  and  school  lands 
was  appointed,  with  Caleb  Atwater  as  chairman.  This  com- 
mittee made  a  report  pointing  out  the  misuse  to  which  the  lands 
had  been  put  and  recommended  that  the  Governor  be  authorized 
to  appoint  seven  commissioners  to  report  to  the  next  general  as- 
sembly a  system  of  education  for  common  schools  and  to  report 
upon  the  condition  of  the  fund  set  apart  by  Congress  for  the  sup- 
port of  common  schools. ^^  This  report  was  adopted  and  the  fol- 
lowing May,  1822,  seven  commissioners  were  appointed,  one  for 
each  kind  of  school  lands,  namely:  sections  sixteen,  Virginia 
Military  lands,  United  States  Military  lands,  lands  in  the  Ohio 
Company  Purchase,  lands  in  the  Symmes  Purchase,  Connecticut 
Reserve  lands,  and  Refugee  lands.^^ 

This  commission  worked  faithfully,  and,  in  December  1823,  pre- 
sented a  report  to  the  legislature  recommending  the  establishment 
of  a  common  school  system  and  the  sale  of  school  lands.  The 
legislature  debated  and  fought  over  the  matter  and,  as  Atwater, 
who  was  one  of  the  commissioners,  related  it,  "finally  broke  up  in 
a  row  and  went  home."^*  The  sale  of  the  school  lands  and  the 
proposed  common  school  system  were  issues  in  the  election  of 
1824.  The  friends  of  these  measures  won  at  the  polls  and  the 
next  legislature  laid  the  foundation  of  the  Ohio  system  of  pub- 
lic schools  and  petitioned  Congress  for  permission  to  sell  the 
school  lands.^^ 


'^i  Atwater:  A  History  of  the  State  of  Ohio,  p.  262. 

^  Ihid.,  p.  255. 

"  Ibid.,  p.  259. 

"  Ibid.,  p.  262. 

s5  Chase:  Statutes  of  Ohio,  II,  pp.  1466-68. 


Management  of  School  Lands  in  the  Northwest  95 

As  soon  as  Congress  empowered  the  legislature  to  sell  the  lands 
large  quantities  were  sold  at  the  last  appraised  value  in  these 
townships  which  consented  to  the  sale.  Holders  of  permanent 
leases  were  given  the  privilege  of  buying  their  lands  at  their  orig- 
inal valuation. ^^  This  policy  involved  a  great  sacrifice  of  some 
of  the  best  school  lands  because  lessees  bought  the  best  of  the  laiid 
they  held  and  refused  to  buy  the  poor  land.  After  ten  years  of 
this  wasteful  practice  the  state  superintendent  of  common  schools 
finally  prevailed  upon  the  legislature  to  repeal  the  law  in  so  far  as 
the  purchase  of  leased  lands  in  the  sections  sixteen  were  concerned. 
The  legislature  still  permitted  the  practice  in  the  military  re- 
serves. In  1837  a  law  was  passed  permitting  lessees  to  purchase 
their  lands  at  an  appraised  value  fixed  by  three  disinterested  per- 
sons.^^  This  law  came  too  late  to  be  of  any  great  benefit  to  educa- 
tion: the  damage  was  already  done. 

As  has  been  pointed  out,  school  lands  could  not  be  sold  without 
the  consent  of  the  township  to  which  they  were  originally  granted 
by  Congress.  Some  townships  refused  to  sell  their  lands  and  con- 
tinued to  lease  them.  It  became  general  for  the  funds  in  these 
townships  to  be  mismanaged,  misappropriated  and  even  em- 
bezzled. The  state  superintendent  and  state  auditor  undertook 
to  recover  these  funds  by  suits  and  prosecutions,  but  after  they 
had  gained  a  verdict  in  the  courts  the  legislature  frequently  came 
to  the  rescue  of  the  guilty  officials  by  passing  relief  bills.  The 
auditor  said  in  his  report  of  1843:  "there  seems  to  be  no  end  to 
the  plunder  upon  this  fund.  ...  I  have  felt  my  energies  re- 
laxed by  the  facility  with  which  relief  bills  have  been  gotten  up, 
and  so  often  succeeded  in  the  General  Assembly.  .  .  .  The 
lands  have  been  squandered  and  the  fund  has  been  plundered  until 
it  is  now  merely  nominal  in  character."  ^^  This  report  evidently 
had  some  effect  upon  the  legislature  for  a  law  was  enacted  which 
placed  the  appraisal  of  school  lands  in  the  hands  of  a  board  con- 
sisting of  non-residents  of  the  township,  appointed  by  the  Court 
of  Common  Pleas.  In  1845  a  minimum  price  of  five  dollars  an 
acre  was  fixed  by  law  and  thenceforth  Ohio  has  adequately  safe- 


66  Chase:  III,  pp.  1552-58.  This  is  the  law  that  authorized  and  fixed  the 
conditions  of  sales  of  school  lands.  Ohio  Laws,  Chap.  712,  passed  Jan.  29, 
1827. 

"  Ohio  Laws,  XXXVII,  pp.  78-79- 

«^»  Knight:  p.  56,  quoting  Ohio  Laws,  XLII,  p.  19. 


96    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

guarded  the  sale  of  school  lands.     But  little  land  remained  to  be 
safeguarded. 

The  change  from  the  leasing  to  the  selling  of  school  lands 
brought  no  better  results  in  Indiana  than  it  had  in  Ohio.  On  the 
twenty-third  of  January,  1829,  soon  after  Congress  authorized  the 
sale  of  the  lands  in  Indiana,  the  state  legislature  set  a  minimum 
price  of  a  dollar  and  a  quarter  an  acre.  Holders  of  leases  could 
not  purchase  their  lands  at  the  original  appraised  value,  but  were 
compelled  to  bid  at  public  auction.^^  The  law  of  1829  further 
provided  that  the  local  commissioners  should  lend  the  money 
derived  from  these  sales  at  six  per  cent,  interest  on  real  estate 
security  for  periods  of  three  years.  An  investigation  of  the 
school  funds  in  1841  revealed  the  fact  that  much  of  the  funds  had 
been  unwisely  invested  and,  in  some  townships,  wholly  lost.  Two 
years  later  the  legislature  enacted  a  law  which  required  that  all 
local  funds  be  turned  over  to  the  county  treasurer  for  investment 
by  him.^^ 

A  new  constitution  was  adopted  in  Indiana  in  1851.  The  next 
year  the  legislature  undertook  to  consolidate  all  school  funds  and 
pro-rate  the  income  among  the  townships  on  a  basis  of  school  en- 
rollment. The  townships  which  had  conserved  their  land  grants 
for  education  fought  this  patently  unjust  plan  on  the  grounds  that 
it  violated  the  conditions  of  the  original  grant  by  Congress  which 
gave  every  section  sixteen  to  the  inhabitants  of  the  township  for 
the  support  of  schools  within  the  township.  The  opponents  of 
this  plan  also  contended  that  it  was  contrary  to  the  state  con- 
stitution. The  Supreme  Court  of  Indiana  upheld  the  contentions 
of  these  townships  and  declared  the  act  invalid.®^ 

By  an  act  of  March  5,  1855,  the  legislature  consolidated  all 
school  funds  except  the  township  school  lands  into  a  common 
school  fund  and  intrusted  the  management  of  the  township  lands 
to  the  county  treasurer.  This  became  the  established  policy  in 
Indiana  except  as  regards  unsold  township  lands  which  were 
leased  by  the  township  trustees  who  were  required  by  law  to  turn 
over  all  rent  money  to  the  county  treasurer .^^  j^  Ohio  the  state 
borrowed  all  the  funds  from  the  townships;  in  Indiana  the  county 
treasurer  made  loans  to  individuals  at  a  rate  of  interest  fixed  by 

^^  Laws  of  Indiana,  1828-29,  pp.  120-28. 
*°  Knight:  pp.  69-70. 
*^  Indiana  Reports,  VI,  pp.  83-100. 
*2  Laws  of  Indiana,  1855,  pp.  161-83. 


Management  of  School  Lands  in  the  Northwest  97 

the  legislature.  The  seminary  and  university  lands  in  Indiana 
were  managed  by  the  legislature  and,  through  mismanagement, 
much  of  this  fund  was  lost  in  bad  loans.  In  all,  less  than  one 
hundred  fifty  thousand  dollars  was  realized  from  the  sale  of  sixty 
thousand  acres  of  the  grants  for  higher  education.®^ 

As  has  been  stated  in  another  connection,  in  183 1  the  legislature 
of  Illinois,  without  waiting  for  the  consent  of  Congress,  authorized 
the  sale  of  school  lands  at  not  less  than  a  dollar  and  a  quarter  an 
acre.^*  Prior  to  sale  the  township  trustees  appraised  the  lands. 
In  1840  a  law  was  passed  which  gave  a  majority  of  the  voters  in 
any  township  the  authority  to  lower  the  appraised  value  fixed  by 
the  trustee,  with  the  restriction  that  the  price  could  not  be  less 
than  the  value  fixed  by  law,  which  was  a  dollar  and  a  quarter  an 
acre.^^  The  voters  had  no  authority  to  increase  the  price  set  by 
the  trustee.  The  next  year  a  new  law  was  enacted  which  provided 
that  the  county  commissioner  should  sell  at  public  auction  the 
school  lands  in  any  township  upon  the  order  of  two-thirds  of  the 
voters  of  the  township.  No  minimum  price  was  fixed  by  law  and, 
as  a  consequence,  in  many  cases  the  lands  were  sold  for  less  than 
one  dollar  an  acre.  By  this  law  the  county  school  commissioners 
were  authorized  to  lend  school  funds  at  twelve  per  cent,  interest.^® 
On  March  i,  1847,  the  management  of  these  funds  was  transferred 
to  the  township  treasurers.^^  Subsequently  there  were  only  minor 
changes  in  the  policy  of  management  of  the  township  school  lands. 

The  university  lands  in  Illinois  were  managed  by  the  legislature. 
The  original  township  granted  by  Congress  proved  to  be  very  poor 
so,  in  1830,  Congress  consented  to  exchange  it  for  another  town- 
ship or  its  equivalent.®*  The  legislature  immediately  offered 
these  lands  for  sale  and  disposed  of  nearly  all  of  them  for  a  dollar 
and  a  quarter  an  acre.  The  state  borrowed  the  money  from  the 
seminary  fund  at  six  per  cent,  interest  and  each  year  borrowed 
the  interest  at  the  same  rate  until  1835  when  the  interest  was  de- 
voted to  the  support  of  common  schools.®^  This  was  a  clearviola- 
tion  of  the  conditions  of  the  grant  by  Congress,  but  the  practice 

^  Knight:  p.  131. 

«*  In  1843  Congress  consented  to  the  sales  and  approved  the  sales  ab-eady 
made.     U.  S.  Statutes  at  Large,  V,  p.  600. 
*  Laws  of  Illinois,  1839-40,  p.  85. 
86  Knight:  p.  81. 

^"^  Laws  of  Illinois,  1846-47,  p.  131-32. 
6*  U.  S.  Statutes  at  Large,  III,  p.  475. 
6«  Laws  of  Illinois,  1834-35,  PP-  22-24. 


98    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

was  continued  until  1857  when  the  State  Normal  University  was 
established. '^^ 

Four  and  one  half  sections  of  the  seminary  lands  remained  un- 
sold in  1 861,  at  which  time  they  were  given  to  the  Illinois  Agricul- 
tural College.  These  lands  were  soon  sold  for  about  twenty  dol- 
lars an  acre,  but  through  mismanagement  part  of  the  proceeds  of 
the  sales  was  lost.  The  state  finally  brought  suit  and  recovered 
some  of  the  lands  which  were  sold  later  for  about  nine  thousand 
dollars.  The  seminary  fund  was  augmented  by  the  addition  of 
the  proceeds  from  the  sale  of  other  public  lands  until  it  reached 
about  one  hundred  sixty  thousand  dollars.  The  history  of  land 
grants  reveals  no  better  example  of  gross  mismanagement  than 
the  seminary  fund  in  Illinois. ^^ 

There  is  some  relief  in  turning  from  the  somewhat  disappointing 
story  of  the  sale  of  school  lands  in  the  first  three  states  formed  in 
the  Northwest  Territory  to  an  account  of  the  sale  of  these  lands  in 
Michigan.  It  will  be  recalled  that  the  policy  of  selling  school 
lands  was  first  adopted  in  Michigan  in  1837  when  the  state  super- 
intendent of  schools  was  authorized  to  sell  the  lands  at  not  less 
than  eight  dollars  an  acre.'^  Within  less  than  a  year  after  the 
enactment  of  this  law  more  than  thirty  thousand  acres  were  sold 
at  approximately  twelve  dollars  an  acre.^^  These  lands  were  sold 
on  time  payments  and  the  period  of  depression  caused  by  the  panic 
of  1837  made  it  impossible  for  many  purchasers  to  meet  their  pay- 
ments. In  1 841  the  legislature  met  this  situation  by  reducing  the 
price  of  the  unsold  lands  to  five  dollars  an  acre  and,  the  following 
year,  gave  relief  to  those  who  had  already  purchased  by  enacting  a 
law  that  provided  that,  upon  application  by  the  purchaser,  the 
land  should  be  appraised  on  the  basis  of  its  value  at  the  time  when 
it  was  purchased  and  the  price  reduced  not  more  than  forty  per 
cent,  of  the  original  purchase  price. ^^  The  school  fund  was  re- 
duced by  approximately  one  hundred  seventy-five  thousand  dol- 
lars by  this  act,  but,  under  the  circumstances,  it  was  probably  a 
very  just  measure. '^^ 

'°  Laws  of  Illinois,  1857,  pp.  298-301. 

'1  Knight:  pp.  135-36. 

'2  Laws  of  Michigan,  1837-38,  p.  209-14. 

'3  Knight:  p.  90,  citing  Mich.  Sen.  Doc.,  1838,  Nos.  43,  44. 

'*  Laws  of  Michigan,  1842,  pp.  44-47.  ^ 

^  Knight  takes  the  position  that  the  legislature  yielded  to  political  pressure  and 
bought  public  favor  at  the  expense  of  the  school  fund.  (Pp.  94-96.)  The  fact 
remains  that  many  purchasers,  due  to  conditions  beyond  their  control,  were  unable 
to  pay  for  their  lands  and  would  have  lost  heavily  if  relief  had  not  been  given. 


Management  of  School  Lands  in  the  Northwest  99 

In  1846  the  minimum  price  of  school  lands  was  reduced  to  four 
dollars  an  acre  although  sales  had  been  increasing  at  the  price  of 
five  dollars.  The  reason  for  this  reduction  has  never  been  dis- 
covered so  the  suspicion  that  it  was  a  political  move  has  grown 
apace.  On  the  whole  the  common  school  lands  in  Michigan  were 
sold  at  a  much  higher  price  than  in  any  of  the  other  states  in  the 
old  Northwest.  Four  dollars  an  acre  seems  high  when  compared 
with  prices  for  which  thousands  and  thousands  of  acres  were  sold 
in  Ohio,  Indiana,  Illinois,  and  Wisconsin.  By  1850  it  had  become 
the  practice  in  Michigan  for  the  state  to  borrow  the  common  school 
fund  and,  by  the  new  constitution  adopted  that  year,  this  was 
made  the  established  policy.'* 

The  university  lands  in  Michigan  were, in  some  respects,  not  as 
well  managed  as  the  common  school  lands.  In  1826  Congress 
granted  seventy-two  sections  to  the  state  of  Michigan  for  higher 
education.  In  1831  the  trustees  of  these  lands,  with  the  consent 
of  Congress,  traded  the  more  valuable  half  of  them  for  a  larger 
quantity  of  inferior  land.''  This  proved  to  be  an  unfortunate 
transaction  because  the  trustees  eventually  sold  the  lands  they 
obtained  by  the  exchange  for  five  thousand  dollars,  while  their 
original  lands  were  valued  at  the  time  of  this  sale  at  five  hundred 
thousand  dollars.'^  Apart  from  this  transaction  the  university 
lands  were  well-managed  in  Michigan,  although  the  legislature, 
under  considerable  pressure,  compromised  with  squatters  on  these 
grants  and  finally,  in  1840,  sold  them  the  lands  they  had  pre- 
empted at  less  than  seven  dollars  an  acre,  much  less  than  their 
value. '^  By  1885  practically  all  of  the  university  lands  were  sold, 
creating  a  fund  of  more  than  five  hundred  thousand  dollars,  the 
largest  in  the  old  Northwest. 

The  first  constitution  of  Wisconsin,  adopted  in  1848,  created  a 
permanent  school  fund  of  the  sections  sixteen,  the  five  hundred 
thousand  acres  given  by  Congress  and  usually  dedicated  to 
internal  improvements,  and  five  per  cent,  of  the  proceeds  from  the 
sale  of  other  public  lands. ^^  The  constitution  also  created  a  board 
for  the  management  of  school  lands,  consisting  of  the  state  Treas- 

'«  Constitution  of  Michigan,  adopted  1850,  Art.  XIV,  Sec.  i.  See  Laws  of 
Michigan,  185 1,  p.  XXVII. 

"  U.  S.  Statutes  at  Large,  VI,  p.  402.  .     . 

'8  Knight:  p.  137,  citing  Gregory:  School  Funds  and  School  Laws  of  Michi- 
gan, p.  61. 

''  Laws  of  Michigan,  1840,  pp.  101-109. 

80  Constitution  of  Wisconsin,  Art.  X,  Sec.  2,  adopted  1848. 


100    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

urer,  the  Secretary  of  State,  and  the  Attorney  General,  who 
should  offer  the  lands  for  sale  after  they  had  been  appraised. ^^ 
In  1850  the  state  legislature  recognized  squatter  rights  by  a  law 
which  permitted  squatters  to  purchase  their  lands  at  a  minimum 
price  of  a  dollar  and  a  quarter  an  acre.^^  This  law  applied  to  set- 
tlers who  had  located  on  the  lands  prior  to  the  grants  by  Congress. 
The  next  year  a  more  general  law  was  enacted  offering  the  same 
terms  to  all  actual  settlers  except  those  already  in  possession  of 
one  hundred  sixty  acres  or  more.^^ 

In  1852  the  minimum  price  of  the  five  hundred  thousand  acres 
grant  and  of  unappraised  school  lands  was  fixed  at  a  dollar  and  a 
quarter  an  acre.^*  Speculators  soon  bought  large  quantities  of 
these  lands  at  the  minimum  price ^^  so,  in  1855,  the  legislature 
limited  the  number  of  acres  that  one  individual  could  purchase.^ 
This  restriction  was  removed  in  1863  and  the  minimum  price  was 
lowered  to  seventy- five  cents  an  acre.^^  This  seems  to  have  been 
a  concession  to  speculators,  probably  with  the  hope  that  new  set- 
tlers would  come  in  to  take  advantage  of  the  low  price  of  lands. 
During  the  next  twenty  years  the  minimum  price  fluctuated  be- 
tween seventy- five  cents  and  a  dollar  and  a  half  an  acre.  The 
guiding  principle  in  fixing  the  price  seems  to  have  been  the  desire 
to  attract  settlers  into  the  state  rather  than  the  purpose  to  use  the 
lands  for  the  advancement  of  education. 

This  tendency  to  sacrifice  school  lands  to  increase  population 
was  also  manifest  to  a  less  degree  in  the  management  of  the  uni- 
versity lands.  It  was  not  until  1838  that  Congress  reserved  the 
two  townships  in  Wisconsin  for  a  university.  The  territorial 
legislature  immediately  created  a  university,  but  the  institution 
was  not  built  during  the  territorial  days.  The  constitution  of 
1848  established  the  state  university  and  created  a  perpetual  fund 
out  of  the  university  land  grants  for  the  support  of  the  university.^^ 
The  lands  were  appraised  and  offered  for  sale  in  1849  at  prices 
ranging  from  one  dollar  and  thirteen  cents  to  seven  dollars  and  six 

*^  Constitution  of  Wisconsin,  Art.  X,  Sec.  8,  adopted  1848. 
*2  Laws  of  Wisconsin,  1850,  p.  194. 
^Ibid.,  1 85 1,  p.  27. 

84 /6ic?.,  1852,  pp.  12-13;  213.  ,j     ,         ^      _, 

85  This  was  easily  done  because  any  lands  that  were  not  sold  when  offered 
at  public  sale  could  then  be  bought  privately  at  the  minimum  price. 
"  Laws  of  Wisconsin,  1855,  pp.  25-26. 

87  76i</..  1863,  p.  359;  430-31.  .      „    .    . 

88  Constitution  of  Wisconsin,  Art.  X,  Sec.  6.  Adopted  1848.  In  Revised 
Statutes  0}  Wisconsin,  1849,  p.  34. 


•  «-  •  •> 

>      •      •  • 


•  ^  * 


Management  of  School  Lands  in  the  Northwest  loi 

cents  an  acre.^^  In  1850  the  legislature  fixed  the  minimum  price 
at  ten  dollars  an  acre  ^^  but  so  much  pressure  was  brought  to  bear 
on  the  legislature  that,  after  making  several  concessions,  the 
minimum  price  was  fixed  at  three  dollars  in  1852.^^  This  action 
led  to  a  large  increase  in  sales  of  the  university  lands. 

The  legislature  soon  began  to  see  that  the  university  lands  had 
been  squandered,  so  Congress  was  petitioned  to  grant  another  two 
townships  for  a  university  in  lieu  of  the  salt  lands  that  had  never 
been  located. ^^  Congress  granted  the  petition  in  1854,^^  but 
within  five  years  the  legislature  had  again  reduced  the  minimum 
price  of  the  university  lands  to  three  dollars  an  acre.  In  1864 
the  legislature  seems  to  have  become  reconciled  to  this  wasteful 
policy  and  made  three  dollars  an  acre  the  fixed  price  of  all  un- 
appraised  lands.  ^"^ 

Wisconsin  was  more  fortunate  in  the  investment  of  the  pro- 
ceeds from  the  sales  of  school  lands  than  in  the  sales  themselves. 
The  first  plan  adopted  by  the  board  of  commissioners  appointed  in 
1849  was  that  of  lending  the  school  funds  to  individuals.  This 
was  in  accord  with  the  provisions  of  the  law  of  1849.  In  i860  it 
was  discovered  that  many  of  the  loans  were  not  adequately  secured 
so  that,  by  reasonable  estimate,  at  least  one  fourth  of  the  money 
loaned  was  lost.^^  Two  years  later,  March  14, 1862,  the  legislature 
authorized  the  commissioners  to  invest  the  funds  in  state  bonds.^ 
The  commissioners  followed  this  policy  until  all  the  available 
state  bonds  were  in  the  school  fund.  On  March  22,  1866,  the 
legislature  made  the  debt  of  the  state  to  the  school  fund  perma- 
nent and  fixed  the  rate  of  interest  at  seven  per  cent.®^  In  1868  the 
commissions  were  empowered  to  invest  the  school,  university, 
normal  school,  and  agricultural  college  funds  in  United  States 
bonds  and  in  the  bonds  of  the  New  England  states  and  of  New 
York  and  Ohio.^^  By  acts  of  1871  and  1872  the  commissioners 
were  authorized  to  invest  the  funds  in  local  school  bonds  and 


89  Knight:  p.  145. 

^^Laws  of  Wisconsin,  1850,  p.  144. 

»i  Ibid.,  1852,  p.  769. 

»2  Knight:  p.  147. 

«3  U.  S.  Statutes  at  Large,  X,  p.  597. 

w  Laws  of  Wisconsin,  1864,  p.  SH- 

95  Knight:  p.  112. 

«6  Laws  of  Wisconsin,  1862,  p.  53. 

97  Ibid.,  1866,  pp.  26-28. 

^^Ibid.,  1868,  p.  112. 


102    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

municipal  bonds  of  the  City  of  Milwaukee. ^^  Since  the  change 
made  in  1862  in  the  general  policy  of  investing  the  school  funds 
the  investments  made  by  the  commissioner  have  been  uniformly 
safe. 

There  is  one  incident  in  the  management  of  the  proceeds  from 
the  sale  of  university  lands  in  Wisconsin  that  is  of  some  signifi- 
cance. In  1862  the  legislature  ordered  the  expenditure  of  part  of 
the  principal  of  this  fund  to  pay  for  the  erection  of  university 
buildings/"^  and  one  hundred  four  thousand  dollars  was  used  for 
this  purpose. ^*^^  This  act  was  clearly  contrary  to  the  state  con- 
stitution and  to  the  conditions  on  which  Congress  had  made  the 
donations  of  the  university  lands.  By  way  of  restitution  of  these 
misappropriated  funds  the  legislature  agreed  to  pay  to  the  uni- 
versity seven  per  cent,  on  the  amount  misappropriated. 

To  summarize  briefly,  the  policy  of  Wisconsin  has  been  to  in- 
vest the  university  fund  of  approximately  three  hundred  fifty 
thousand  dollars  in  government  and  municipal  bonds.  Not- 
withstanding the  fact  that  there  was  a  marked  tendency  to  sacri- 
fice school  lands  to  attract  immigration  to  the  state,  on  the  whole 
the  school  lands  and  funds  of  Wisconsin  were  as  well-managed  as 
any  in  the  Northwest. 

^^  Laws  of  Wisconsin,  1871,  pp.  52-56;  1872,  p.  136.     The  investment  in  the 
bonds  of  Milwaukee  was  limited  to  $500,000  in  water  bonds. 
^^^  Ibid.,  1862,  pp.  168-69. 
"1  Knight:  p.  149. 


CHAPTER   IX 

LATER  APPLICATIONS  OF  THE  PRINCIPLE  OF 
LAND  GRANTS  FOR  EDUCATION 

Thus  far  this  study  has  been  confined  almost  exclusively  to  the 
history  of  the  land  grants  for  education  in  the  Northwest  Terri- 
tory. There  are  two  reasons  for  this,  namely:  (i)  the  early 
ordinances  dealt  primarily  with  this  section  of  the  country,  and 
{2)  it  was  in  the  territories  and  states  erected  in  this  old  North- 
west that  the  precedents  for  the  support  of  public  education  by 
federal  land  grants  were  firmly  established.  The  final  task  of  this 
work  is  to  show  how  the  early  land  ordinances  affected  the  general 
policy  of  the  national  government  as  regards  education  and  to 
explain  in  some  detail  the  influence  of  these  ordinances  on  the 
development  of  the  public  school  system  in  the  United  States. 

During  the  first  ten  or  fifteen  years  after  the  adoption  of  the 
federal  constitution  there  appeared  to  be  a  strong  probability 
that  the  new  government  would  not  continue  the  policy  of  making 
land  grants  for  the  support  of  schools.  Considerable  opposition 
to  this  policy  developed  in  the  older  states  that  had  no  public  lands 
within  their  borders  which  could  be  thus  used  to  encourage  educa- 
tion. It  was  during  this  period  when  the  national  land  policy 
was  taking  definite  form  that  the  early  efforts  in  Ohio  to  estab- 
lish schools  through  the  use  of  the  land  grants  for  education  were 
of  untold  importance  in  keeping  this  policy  alive  until  it  was  finally 
adopted  by  the  national  government. 

From  the  adoption  of  the  national  constitution  to  the  passage 
of  the  act  enabling  Ohio  to  become  a  state,  April  30,  1802,  only 
two  land  laws  of  any  significance  were  enacted  by  Congress. 
These  were  the  laws  of  May  18,  1796,  and  May  10,  1800,  both  of 
which  dealt  with  the  manner  of  sale  of  public  lands  in  the  North- 
west. Neither  of  these  laws  made  any  reservations  of  land  for  the 
support  of  schools.  It  looked  as  if  the  national  government  in- 
tended to  shift  the  responsibility  for  compliance  with  the  educa- 
tional provisions  of  the  Ordinance  of  1787  upon  the  inhabitants  of 
the  Northwest  Territory.  The  only  land  grant  for  education 
during  this  period  was  the  renewal  in  1792  of  the  grant  of  one 

103 


104    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

township  to  John  Cleves  Symmes,  who  had  obtained  this  grant  in 
his  original  contract,  August  29, 1787,  and  later  forfeited  it  through 
failure  to  comply  with  the  ternis  of  this  contract.^  Apart  from 
this  one  instance  Congress  showed  no  disposition  to  follow  the 
example  set  by  the  land  grants  for  schools  contained  in  the  con- 
tract with  the  Ohio  Company. 

In  so  far  as  the  national  government  is  concerned  the  first  act 
of  Congress  to  embody  the  policy  of  land  grants  for  education  was 
the  Enabling  Act  of  Ohio,  which  reserved  every  section  sixteen  for 
the  support  of  schools.  The  history  of  this  act  and  the  subse- 
quent acts  which  extended  this  policy  to  the  Connecticut  and 
Virginia  Military  Reserve,  then  to  the  other  territories  of  the 
Northwest,  has  already  been  traced.  It  remains  to  be  shown  how 
this  policy  of  land  grants  for  education  was  extended  and  applied 
in  other  public  land  states. 

The  first  three  states  admitted  into  the  Union,  after  the  original 
thirteen,  were  Vermont,  in  1791,  Kentucky,  in  1792,  and  Tennes- 
see, in  1796.  These  were  not,  strictly  speaking,  public  land  states 
and  no  grants  for  education  were  made  in  any  of  them  at  the  time  of 
admission.  While  it  is  true  that,  in  1780,  Virginia  had  granted 
eight  thousand  acres  for  the  founding  of  a  seminary  of  learning  in 
the  county  of  Kentucky,  the  national  government  did  nothing  to 
extend  the  policy  of  land  grants  south  of  the  Ohio  river  before 
1803.  In  that  year,  March  3,  Congress  reserved  every  section 
sixteen  in  the  territory  south  of  Tennessee  for  the  use  of  schools 
and  made  a  special  grant  for  Jefferson  College  at  Natchez.^ 

On  April  18,  1806,  Congress  passed  a  bill  settling  certain  claims 
in  Tennessee.  It  provided  that  one  hundred  thousand  acres 
should  be  reserved  for  two  colleges,  one  hundred  thousand  acres 
for  academies,  one  to  be  established  in  every  county,  and  one  sec- 
tion in  each  township  reserved  for  public  schools.^  Three  days 
later,  April  21,  1806,  an  act  adjusting  claims  in  the  Territory  of 
Orleans  and  in  the  District  of  Louisiana  also  provided  that  section 
sixteen  in  every  township  should  be  reserved  for  public  schools  and 
one  entire  township  for  a  seminary  of  learning.*  This  act  was  in 
response  to  a  petition  of  the  Legislative  Council  of  the  Territory 
of  Orleans  asking  Congress  to  make  grants  in  that  territory  similar 

1  Journal  of  Congress,  XII,  p.  150  f. 
'  U.  S.  Land  Laws,  I,  p.  97. 
'  Ihid.,  p.  136. 
*  Ibid.,  p.  142. 


Later  Applications  of  the  Principle  of  Land  Grants        105 

to  those  made  in  the  Mississippi  Territory  in  1803.  The  chief 
argument  set  forth  in  this  petition  in  support  of  this  request  was 
the  reasonableness  and  justice  of  extending  the  educational  pro- 
visions of  the  Ordinance  of  1785  to  other  public  lands.^  The  terms 
of  these  grants  of  1803  and  1806  were  similar  to  those  of  the 
grants  in  Ohio. 

At  the  time  of  the  admission  of  Louisiana  in  18 12,  and  of  Missis- 
sippi in  181 7,  nothing  was  said  in  the  enabling  acts  as  regards  land 
grants  for  education,  but  this  fact  in  no  wise  affected  the  grants 
previously  made  during  the  territorial  days  of  these  states.  In- 
diana had  been  admitted  in  18 16  with  grants  similar  to  those  made 
in  Ohio  and,  in  1818,  Illinois  was  admitted  with  the  new  provision 
which  granted  section  sixteen  in  each  township  "to  the  state,  for 
the  use  of  the  inhabitants  of  such  township,  for  the  use  of  schools.'* 
This  seemed  to  be  a  move  forward,  but  the  next  year,  March  2, 
1 8 19,  the  act  enabling  Alabama  to  become  a  state  revived  the 
policy  pursued  in  Ohio  and  granted  section  sixteen  to  the  inhabi- 
tants of  the  township  for  the  use  of  schools.®  This  act  also  con- 
tained a  grant  of  one  township  for  a  seminary  of  learning,  title  to 
which  was  vested  in  the  state  legislature. 

In  1 8 12,  when  the  territory  of  Orleans  became  the  state  of 
Louisiana,  the  name  of  the  Louisiana  territory  was  changed  to 
Missouri  territory  by  an  act  of  Congress  June  fourth  of  that  year.'' 
The  only  reference  to  education  in  this  act  was  the  repetition  of  the 
famous  educational  provision  of  the  Ordinance  of  1787.  On  Feb- 
ruary 17,  1 818,  Congress  reserved  two  townships  in  the  Missouri 
territory,  one  on  the  Missouri  river  and  the  other  on  the  Arkansas 
river,  for  the  establishment  of  two  seminaries  of  learning.^  Two 
years  later,  March  6,  1820,  the  act  enabling  Missouri  to  become  a 
state  confirmed  the  seminary  grant  on  the  Missouri  river  and  also 
granted  section  sixteen  in  each  township  to  the  state  for  the  use  of 
the  inhabitants  of  the  township  for  the  use  of  schools.^  The  pro- 
visions of  this  act  went  into  effect  the  following  year  when  Mis- 
souri was  admitted  into  the  Union.  Thus  Congress  returned  to 
the  form  of  grant  made  in  Illinois. 

There  is  one  incident  in  the  history  of  land  grants  for  education 

^  Am.  St.  Pap.  Pub.  Lands,  I,  p.  259. 
^  U.  S.  Statutes  at  Large,  III,  p.  489. 
'  Ibid.,  II,  p.  747. 
^  Ibid.,  Ill,  p.  407. 
^Ibid.,  Ill,  p.  547. 


io6    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

in  Missouri  that  is  of  interest  for  the  reason  that  it  throws  some 
light  on  the  educational  views  held  by  Congress.  In  1818  a  peti- 
tion from  Missouri  requested  Congress  to  permit  the  sale  of  one 
half  of  the  sections  reserved  for  schools  and  the  establishment  of 
an  academy  in  St.  Charles  county  with  the  proceeds  thus  derived. 
Congress  denied  this  petition  on  the  grounds  that  reading  and 
writing  for  the  many  was  better  than  higher  learning  for  the  iew.^^ 

The  act  enabling  Maine  to  become  a  state  in  1820  was  silent  on 
land  grants  for  education  because  Maine  was  not  a  public  land 
state.  After  the  admission  of  Missouri,  Arkansas  was  the  next 
state  which  came  into  the  Union.  The  enabling  act  for  Arkansas, 
passed  June  23,  1836,  contained  the  same  provisions  as  regards 
land  grants  for  education  as  the  enabling  act  for  Missouri.  The 
seminary  township  grant  was  confirmed  and  each  section  sixteen 
was  granted  to  the  state,  for  the  use  of  the  inhabitants  of  such 
township,  for  the  use  of  schools.^^ 

Michigan  became  a  state  in  1837  and,  as  has  been  shown,  re- 
ceived a  new  type  of  land  grant  for  education,  far  superior  to  either 
the  type  of  grant  made  to  Ohio  or  to  Illinois.  In  the  case  of 
Michigan  every  section  sixteen  was  granted  to  the  state  for  the  use 
of  schools.  The  funds  derived  from  school  land  could  thus  be 
used  to  develop  schools  in  any  part  of  the  state  regardless  of  town- 
ship lines.  This  did  much  to  aid  in  the  development  of  a  well- 
organized  state  system  of  education. 

The  full  importance  of  this  new  policy  evidently  was  not  appre- 
ciated by  Congress  at  the  time  of  the  admission  of  the  next  state, 
Florida,  in  1845.  The  enabling  act  for  Florida,  enacted  March  3, 
1845,  granted  to  the  state  "section  sixteen  in  every  township,  or 
other  lands  equivalent  thereto,  for  the  use  of  the  inhabitants  of 
such  township  for  the  support  of  public  schools;  also,  two  entire 
townships  of  land,  in  addition  to  the  two  townships  already  re- 
served, for  the  use  of  two  seminaries  of  learning."  ^^  This  act 
further  provided  that  five  per  cent,  of  the  net  proceeds  from  the 
sale  of  other  public  lands  within  the  state  should  be  used  for  educa- 
tion. From  this  it  would  appear  that  Congress  had  returned  to 
the  policy  of  granting  sections  sixteen  to  the  state  for  the  use  of 
the  inhabitants  of  each  township,  as  in  the  case  of  the  grants  to 


iMm.  St.  Pap.  Pub.  Lands,  III,  p.  302. 
"  U.  S.  Statutes  at  Large,  V,  p.  58. 
« Ibid.,  p.  788. 


Later  Applications  of  the  Principle  of  Land  Grants        107 

Illinois.  This,  however,  is  not  true;  the  truth  is.  Congress  had  no 
well-defined  policy  at  this  time  with  reference  to  land  grants  for 
education.  On  the  same  day,  March  3,  1845,  that  the  enabling 
act  for  Florida  became  law  another  act  was  passed,  enabling  Iowa 
to  become  a  state.  This  law  contained  the  provision  "that  sec- 
tion numbered  sixteen  in  every  township  of  public  lands,  and, 
where  such  sections  have  been  sold  or  otherwise  disposed  of,  other 
lands  equivalent  thereto,  and  as  continguous  as  may  be,  shall  be 
granted  to  the  State  for  the  use  of  schools."  ^^  Seventy- two  sec- 
tions also  were  granted  to  the  state  for  a  university.  In  the  ex- 
citement of  the  closing  hours  of  the  last  day  of  its  existence  the 
Congress  that  passed  these  two  enabling  acts  was  apparently 
wholly  unconscious  of  the  fact  that  they  contained  two  very  dis- 
tinct types  of  land  grants  for  education. 

The  annexation  of  Texas  did  not  involve  the  question  of  land 
grants  for  education  since  Texas  was  not  a  public  land  state.  In 
1846  Iowa  came  into  the  Union  on  the  terms  of  the  enabling  act  of 
March  3,  1845,  and  thenceforth  the  government  continued  to  ad- 
here to  the  Michigan  type  of  educational  grant  in  admitting  new 
states.  The  only  exceptions  to  this  were  California  and  West 
Virginia,  and  in  the  case  of  California  sections  sixteen  and  thirty- 
six  in  each  township  were  granted  to  the  state  for  public  schools  on 
March  3,  1853.^^^  This  policy  of  granting  two  sections  in  each 
township  for  education  was  instituted  in  the  law  of  1848,  authoriz- 
ing the  survey  of  the  Oregon  territory.  The  enabling  acts  for  the 
next  three  states  admitted  into  the  Union,  Minnesota,  February 
26,  1857,1^  Oregon,  February  14,  1859,^*  and  Kansas,  January  29, 
1861,^^  granted  to  each  of  these  states  sections  sixteen  and  thirty- 
six  for  common  schools  and  seventy- two  sections  to  each  of  them 
for  a  university.  The  enabling  act  for  Nevada,  March  21,  1864,^* 
granted  only  sections  sixteen  and  thirty-six,  but  on  July  4,  1866, 
Congress  made  the  customary  grant  of  seventy-two  sections  for  a 
university  and  extended  to  Nevada  the  provisions  of  the  famous 
act  of  July  2,  1862,  which  made  the  grants  for  agricultural  and 
mechanical  colleges.^® 

"  U.  S.  Statutes  at  Large,  V,  p.  789. 

"  Ibid.,  X,  p.  244. 

15  Ibid.,  XI,  p.  167. 

i«  Ibid.,  XI,  pp.  383-84. 

^' Ibid.,  Xll,  p.  127. 

"  Ibid.,  XIII,  pp.  30-32. 

"  Ibid.,  XIV,  p.  85. 


io8    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

On  April  19,  1864,  Congress  passed  the  act  enabling  Nebraska 
to  become  a  state.^^  The  usual  grants  to  the  state  of  sections  six- 
teen and  thirty-six  for  common  schools  and  seventy-two  sections 
for  a  university  were  made  and,  in  addition  thereto,  the  state  was 
granted  five  per  cent,  of  the  net  proceeds  from  the  sale  of  other  un- 
reserved public  lands  for  the  support  of  common  schools.  The  use 
of  this  five  per  cent,  for  schools  was  by  no  means  new,  for  it  had 
been  a  common  practice  for  Congress  to  grant  this  revenue  to  the 
states  for  roads  or  other  internal  improvements  and  in  many  cases 
it  had  been  used,  by  special  permission  of  Congress,  for  education. 
The  significance  of  this  provision  in  the  enabling  act  of  Nebraska 
is  that  it  shows  the  tendency  for  this  practice  to  become  an  es- 
tablished policy  of  the  national  government. 

In  the  case  of  Colorado  Congress  adopted  another  policy  of 
great  importance  with  reference  to  the  land  grants  for  education. 
Sections  sixteen  and  thirty-six  were  reserved  to  the  state  for  com- 
mon schools  by  an  act  of  March  21,  1864,  at  the  time  this  same 
grant  was  made  to  Nevada.^^  Then,  in  1875,  when  Colorado 
became  a  state,  the  usual  grant  of  seventy- two  sections  for  a 
university  was  made.^^  In  this  act  which  made  the  university 
grant  was  the  interesting  provision  that  the  sections  sixteen  and 
thirty-six  could  not  be  sold  for  less  than  two  dollars  and  a  half  an 
acre.  Why  Congress  had  never  seen  fit  until  this  time  to  put  ade- 
quate restrictions  upon  the  sale  of  school  lands  is  difficult  to  un- 
derstand. The  wisdom  of  this  policy  has  been  demonstrated  in 
recent  years  in  every  state  where  it  has  been  followed  and,  in  ad- 
mitting states  since  Colorado,  Congress  has  generally  placed  such 
restrictions  upon  the  sale  of  school  lands  as  to  prevent  their  being 
sacrificed  or  squandered  as  was  so  frequently  the  case  in  the  older 
states. 

On  February  22,  1889,  Congress  passed  the  enabling  act  for 
Montana,  North  Dakota,  South  Dakota,  and  Washington.^* 
Sections  sixteen  and  thirty-six  in  each  of  the  states  was  granted  to 
the  state  for  public  schools  and  seventy-two  sections  were  granted 
to  each  state  for  a  university.  A  minimum  price  of  ten  dollars  an 
acre  was  placed  upon  both  university  and  common  school  lands; 
the  proceeds  from  the  sale  of  the  latter  were  to  go  into  the  common 

2°  U.  S.  Statutes  at  Large,  XIII,  pp.  47-50. 

"  Ibid.,  pp.  32-35. 

«  Act  of  Mar.  3,  1875,  U.  S.  Statutes  at  Large,  XVIII,  pp.  475-76. 

2«  U.  S.  Statutes  at  Large,  XXV,  pp.  679-81. 


Later  Applications  of  the  Principle  of  Land  Grants        109 

school  fund.  By  the  terms  of  this  act  each  of  the  states,  Montana, 
Washington,  and  North  Dakota,  received  ninety  thousand  acres 
for  an  agricultural  and  mechanical  college  and  South  Dakota  re- 
ceived one  hundred  twenty  thousand  acres  for  this  purpose.  This 
provision  was  in  accord  with  the  terms  of  the  agricultural  and 
mechanical  college  act  of  1862^^  and  subsequent  acts  extending  its 
provisions  to  new  states  formed  after  its  enactment.  In  addition 
to  these  grants  each  of  these  four  states  was  granted  for  educa- 
tion five  per  cent,  of  the  net  proceeds  from  the  sale  of  other  public 
lands  lying  within  its  bounds. 

When  Idaho  became  a  state,  July  3,  1890,  the  act  of  admission 
granted  to  the  state  sections  sixteen  and  thirty-six  for  common 
schools,  seventy-two  sections  for  a  university,  ninety  thousand 
acres  for  an  agricultural  college,  and  five  per  cent,  of  the  net  pro- 
ceeds from  the  sale  of  other  public  lands  within  the  state  for  com- 
mon schools.2^  The  minimum  price  of  the  university  lands  was 
fixed  at  ten  dollars  an  acre.  Idaho  also  was  granted  one  hundred 
thousand  acres  for  a  scientific  school,  one  hundred  thousand  acres 
for  state  normal  schools,  and  fifty  thousand  acres  for  a  university 
at  Moscow;  the  minimum  price  fixed  at  ten  dollars  an  acre. 

These  additional  grants  were  made  in  lieu  of  the  grants  usually 
made  for  internal  improvements  under  the  act  of  1841.2^  Every 
public  land  state  admitted  between  1845  and  1889,  with  the  excep- 
tion of  Minnesota,  had  diverted  these  grants  for  internal  improve- 
ments to  the  support  of  education;  so,  for  this  reason.  Congress; 
adopted  this  policy  of  making  specific  grants  for  education  in  lieu 
of  these  grants  for  internal  improvements.  Wyoming  came  into 
the  Union  a  week  after  Idaho,  July  10,  1890,  with  the  same  grants 
for  a  university,  agricultural  college,  and  common  schools,  and 
with  a  special  grant  of  thirty  thousand  acres  for  a  school  for  the 
deaf  and  dumb  and  blind  .^^ 

The  enabling  act  for  Utah,  July  16,  1894,  contained  the  most 
liberal  grants  for  education  that  Congress  had  made  up  to  that 
time.2^  By  this  act  Utah  received  sections  two,  sixteen,  thirty- 
two,  and  thirty-six,  or  their  equivalent,  for  common  schools,  five 
per  cent,  of  the  net  proceeds  from  the  sale  of  other  public  lands 

2*  U.  S.  Statutes  at  Large,  XII,  p.  503. 

26  Ihid.,  XVI,  pp.  215-17. 

»  Ihid.,  V,  p.  453. 

2'  Ihid.,  XXVI,  pp.  222-26. 

^Uhid.,  XXVIII,  pp.  107-12. 


no    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

for  the  common  school  fund,  two  townships  for  a  university,  and 
two  hundred  thousand  acres  for  an  agricultural  college.  The 
special  grants  were  one  hundred  ten  thousand  acres  for  the  uni- 
versity, in  lieu  of  saline  lands,  and  in  lieu  of  swamp  lands,  one 
hundred  thousand  acres  for  a  school  of  mines,  to  be  connected  with 
the  university,  one  hundred  thousand  acres  for  normal  schools, 
and  one  hundred  thousand  acres  for  a  school  for  the  blind.  The 
legislature  was  given  power  to  regulate  the  sale  of  school  lands. 

This  same  liberal  policy  was  followed  in  admitting  the  last  three 
states,  Oklahoma,  Arizona,  and  New  Mexico.  The  enabling  act 
for  Oklahoma,  June  i6,  1906,  granted  to  the  state  sections  sixteen 
and  thirty-six  for  common  schools,  with  certain  restrictions  on 
such  sections  in  Indian,  military,  and  national  reservations; 
$5,000,000,  in  lieu  of  sections  sixteen  and  thirty-six  in  Indian 
Territory ;  every  section  thirteen,  open  to  settlement,  in  Oklahoma 
or  Indian  Territory,  distributed  as  follows:  one-third  for  the 
university,  one-third  for  the  normal  schools,  one-third  to  the  agri- 
cultural and  mechanical  college  and  the  colored  normal  univer- 
sity; two  hundred  fifty  thousand  acres  for  a  university;  one  hun- 
dred fifty  thousand  acres  for  a  university  preparatory  school ;  two 
hundred  fifty  thousand  acres  for  an  agricultural  and  mechanical 
college;  three  hundred  thousand  acres  for  normal  schools;  one 
hundred  thousand  acres  for  a  colored  agricultural  and  normal  uni- 
versity; and  five  per  cent,  of  the  net  proceeds  from  the  sale  of 
other  public  lands  for  the  common  school  fund.^^  The  act  per- 
mitted the  leasing  of  common  school  lands  for  not  more  than  ten 
years  and  of  university  lands  for  not  more  than  five  years.  The 
sale  of  school  lands  after  appraisal  by  three  disinterested  ap- 
praisers was  also  permitted. 

The  enabling  act  for  New  Mexico ^°  and  Arizona,^^  June  20, 
1 9 10,  granted  to  each  state  sections  two,  sixteen,  thirty- two,  and 
thirty-six  for  common  schools,  two  hundred  thousand  acres  for  a 
university,  one  hundred  fifty  thousand  acres  for  an  agricultural 
and  mechanical  college,  one  hundred  fifty  thousand  acres  for  a 
school  of  mines,  two  hundred  thousand  acres  for  normal  schools, 
and  one  hundred  thousand  acres  for  a  military  institute.  The 
minimum  price  of  school  lands  in  New  Mexico  was  fixed  at  three 


"  U.  S.  Statutes  at  Large,  XXXIV,  Pt.  i,  pp.  267-85. 
*^Ihid.,  XXXVI,  Pt.  I.  pp.  562-63. 
"  Ibid.,  pp.  572-74. 


Later  Applications  of  the  Principle  of  Land  Grants        1 1 1 

or  five  dollars  an  acre,  depending  upon  the  location.  In  Arizona 
the  nainimum  price  was  fixed  at  three  dollars  an  acre.  The  lands 
in  New  Mexico  and  Arizona  that  were  irrigrated  or  could  be  irri- 
gated were  an  exception  to  these  provisions  concerning  minimum 
prices.  For  these  lands  the  minimum  price  was  fixed  at  twenty- 
five  dollars.  This  act  further  provided  that  no  school  lands  in 
either  state  can  ever  be  sold  until  they  have  been  appraised. 
This  enabling  act  was  the  last  of  such  acts  passed  by  Congress,  for 
with  the  admission  of  New  Mexico  and  Arizona  into  the  Union 
the  last  of  the  public  domain  within  the  United  States  was  or- 
ganized into  states. 

In  addition  to  the  enabling  acts  and  the  other  laws  that  have 
been  discussed  in  the  foregoing  there  were  a  number  of  other  acts 
of  considerable  importance  as  regards  land  grants  for  education. 
It  is  in  place  here  to  outline  briefly  the  nature  and  importance  of 
these  laws.  First  among  these  was  the  preemption  act  of  Sep- 
tember 4,  1841,^2  which  provided  for  the  distribution  of  the  net 
proceeds  from  the  sale  of  public  lands  among  the  states  then  in 
the  Union,  or  subsequently  admitted,  on  a  basis  of  their  represen- 
tation in  Congress.  By  this  act  five  hundred  thousand  acres 
were  granted  to  each  state  for  internal  improvements.  While 
this  law  did  not  make  a  specific  grant  for  education,  as  has  already 
been  pointed  out,  it  became  a  common  practice  to  devote  the  funds 
thus  derived  to  the  support  of  schools.  This  act  of  1841  was  the 
culmination  of  a  series  of  laws  extending  over  a  period  of  eleven 
years,  the  chief  concern  of  which  was  the  preemption  policy;  while 
the  main  significance  of  this  act  was  in  that  connection,  it  was  also 
of  great  importance  because  it  provided  a  source  from  which  pub- 
lic education  will  ultimately  receive  more  than  sixty  millions  of 
dollars. 

The  next  law  of  any  consequence  for  education  was  the  act  of 
September  28,  1850,  which  granted  the  swamp  lands  in  Arkansas 
to  that  state  and  extended  this  grant  to  all  other  states  then  in  the 
Union,  or  subsequently  admitted.  As  in  the  case  of  the  grants  of 
1841,  these  swamp  land  grants,  or  the  lands  granted  in  lieu  of 
them,  were  generally  devoted  to  education.  In  all,  public  schools 
have  received  more  than  forty  million  acres  from  this  source. 

Perhaps  the  most  important  single  act  for  education  ever  passed 
by  Congress  was  that  of  July  2,  1862,  which  made  the  land  grants 

^  U.  5.  Statutes  at  Large,  V,  p.  453. 


112    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

for  agricultural  and  mechanical  coUeges.^^  To  every  state  not  in 
rebellion  were  granted  thirty  thousand  acres  for  each  senator  and 
representative;  the  proceeds  from  the  sale  of  these  lands  were  to 
remain  an  undiminished  fund  which  should  be  invested  at  five  per 
cent,  in  bonds  of  the  United  States  or  other  good  securities;  the  in- 
come was  to  be  used  for  the  maintenance  of  colleges  teaching  agri- 
culture, the  mechanic  arts,  military  science,  and  such  other  courses 
deemed  proper;  but  no  funds  could  be  used  for  buildings.  To 
states  in  which  there  were  no  available  public  lands  scrip  was  to  be 
issued  in  lieu  thereof.  On  April  14,  1864,  the  provisions  of  this 
act  were  extended  so  that  any  state  could  participate  in  its  benefits 
upon  acceptance  of  its  conditions .^"^  The  provisions  of  this  act 
were  extended,  on  July  23,  1866,^^  to  any  new  state  upon  its  ad- 
mission into  the  Union  and  on  January  23,  1873,  the  time  for  the 
acceptance  of  provisions  of  the  act  of  July  2,  1862,  was  extended 
to  the  first  of  July,  1874.^®  This  enabled  all  the  southern  states  to 
participate  in  the  benefits  of  this  law.  More  than  eleven  million 
acres  have  been  granted  to  the  states  under  the  provisions  of  the 
act  of  July  2,  1862,  and  the  subsequent  acts  extending  its  pro- 
visions.^^ 

The  next  act  of  importance  was  that  of  March  2,  1887,  for  es- 
tablishing agricultural  experiment  stations.^^  This  law  granted 
to  each  state  $15,000  out  of  the  proceeds  from  the  sale  of  public 

33  U.  S.  Statutes  at  Large,  XII,  pp.  503-5. 

"mj.,  XIII,  p.  47. 

35  Ibid.,  XIV.  p.  208. 

^  Ibid.,  XWll,  pp.  416-17. 

"  The  table  given  herewith  summarizes  the  chief  land  grants  for  education 
made  by  the  national  government.  It  was  compiled  from  data  drawn  largely 
from  the  article  on  the  National  Government  and  Education  in  the  Cyclopedic 
of  Education,  IV,  p.  377  ff.  These  data  were  compared  with  other  authorities 
and  checked  against  the  facts  presented  in  this  work.  While  absolute  accuracy 
is  impossible  in  such  a  table,  this  is  approximately  correct. 

No.  of     Approximate 
Acres  Value 

Common  school  section  grants 81,064,300  $410,000,000 

Saline  grants 900,000        1,000,000 

Five  per  cent,  fund 7,187,316 

Amount  used  for  education  derived  from  act  of 

1841,  before  1889 14,000,000 

Grants  since  1889  in  lieu  of  other  grants 1 1,243,080      50,000,000 

Swamp  lands  granted  since  1850  used  for  schools      40,000,000       13,000,000 

University  grants 3,500,000      30,000,000 

Grants  under  terms  of  act  of  July  2,  1862 11,367,832      30,000,000 

Totals 148,075,212  $555,187,316 

38  U.  S.  Statutes  at  Large,  XXIV,  pp.  440-41. 


Later  Application  of  the  Principle  of  Land  Grants         113 

lands  for  the  founding  of  such  experiment  stations  in  connection 
with  the  agricultural  and  mechanical  colleges.  On  August  30, 
1890,  Congress  enacted  a  law  which  granted  to  each  state  for  the 
support  of  the  agricultural  colleges  $15,000  for  that  year  and  that 
amount  increased  by  $1,000  annually  for  ten  years;  thereafter 
each  state  was  to  receive  $25,000  annually.  All  of  these  funds 
were  to  be  drawn  from  the  proceeds  from  the  sale  of  public 
lands.^^  On  May  17,  1900  a  supplementary  act  was  passed  which 
provided  that  if  the  proceeds  from  the  sale  of  public  land  were  not 
sufhcient  to  meet  these  payments  the  balance  should  be  paid  by 
the  United  States  .'^^  These  acts  are  of  special  importance  be- 
cause they  mark  the  transition  from  land  grants  for  education, 
through  money  grants  out  of  the  proceeds  from  the  sale  of  public 
lands,  to  money  grants  for  education  from  the  general  revenue  of 
the  United  States. 


39  U.  S.  Statutes  at  Large,  XXVI,  pp.  18-19. 

"/&R,  XXXI,  p.  179. 


CHAPTER  X 
SUMMARY  AND  CONCLUSIONS 

In  this  final  chapter  a  few  of  the  main  conclusions  that  may  be 
legitimately  drawn  from  the  facts  presented  in  this  study  will  be 
set  forth  briefly.  That  the  basis  of  the  conclusions  may  be  clearly 
established  a  summary  will  first  be  made  of  the  foregoing  chapters. 

SUMMARY 

The  purpose  of  the  first  chapter  was  to  explain  the  economic  and 
political  importance  of  the  West  at  the  time  of  the  enactment  of 
the  early  land  ordinances.  To  this  end  it  was  shown  that  after 
1763  the  fundamental  problem  as  regards  the  West  was  an  eco- 
nomic one.  If  that  region  lying  between  the  Allegheny  mountains 
and  the  Mississippi  river  was  to  remain  a  part  of  the  English 
colonies  it  was  necessary  that  it  be  bound  to  the  east  by  economic 
ties.  The  conspiracies  to  win  the  West  away  from  the  Union 
which  developed  after  the  Revolution  were  inspired  by  the  great 
economic  value  of  the  Ohio  and  Mississippi  valleys,  and  the  con- 
spirators' hope  of  success  was  based  upon  the  economic  needs  of 
the  West.  After  1763  there  was  a  gradual  growth  in  the  conscious- 
ness of  these  needs  in  the  middle  colonies  and  Virginia  which  led  to 
the  early  projects  for  the  improvement  of  the  means  of  communi- 
cation and  transportation  between  the  back  country  and  the 
Atlantic  seaboard. 

Next  after  the  economic  value  of  the  West  the  problem  of  the 
political  organization  of  that  section  was  of  prime  importance. 
By  the  close  of  the  Revolution  it  was  generally  recognized  that  the 
political  institutions  of  the  new  nation  must  be  extended  into  the 
West  in  order  to  hold  that  section  to  the  new  government.  The 
surrender  of  claims  to  western  lands  by  the  various  states,  es- 
pecially the  terms  of  the  Virginia  cession  which  provided  for  the 
formation  of  new  states  in  the  ceded  territory,  indicated  the 
drift  of  public  opinion  and  foreshadowed  the  ultimate  solution  of 
the  problem  of  government  of  the  West. 

The  second  chapter  outlined  the  history  of  the  early  ordinances 
dealing  with  the  West.  It  was  shown  how  the  final  treaty  of  peace 
114 


Summary  and  Conclusions  115 

with  England  in  1 783  gave  a  new  impetus  to  the  westward  move- 
ment and  made  acute  the  need  for  a  governmental  ordinance  for 
the  newly  acquired  territory.  The  Virginia  act  of  cession  of  the 
western  lands  to  the  national  government  had  provided  for  the 
nationalization  of  these  western  lands  and  the  adoption  of  this 
policy  had  been  assured  by  the  acts  of  other  states  relinquishing 
claims  to  the  back  country. 

With  the  West  in  possession  of  the  national  government  it 
devolved  upon  Congress  to  establish  some  form  of  government 
over  that  region.  The  Ordinance  of  1784  was  the  first  attempt  to 
perform  this  task.  While  this  ordinance  remained  a  dead  letter  it 
is  important  for  two  reasons:  (i)  it  nationalized  the  West  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  terms  of  the  Virginia  act  of  cession;  (2)  it  was 
silent  as  regards  land  grants  for  education.  This  ordinance  was 
not  a  land  law  but  a  governmental  ordinance  and  it  is  therefore  of 
more  importance  from  the  point  of  view  of  political  theory  than 
for  its  bearing  on  the  national  land  policy.  It  was  understood  at 
the  time  of  its  enactment  that  Congress  would  also  pass  a  law  for 
the  sale  of  the  western  lands.     In  1785  such  a  law  was  enacted. 

The  Ordinance  of  1785  was  a  land  law.  Its  purpose  was  to 
establish  a  policy  for  the  survey  and  sale  of  the  public  domain  that 
would  be  acceptable  to  all  sections  of  the  country.  Because  of  the 
two  very  distinct  and  conflicting  methods  of  surveying  public 
lands  in  use  at  the  time,  the  Ordinance  of  1785  was  a  compromise 
between  the  New  England  township  plan  and  the  southern  method 
of  indiscriminate  surveys  of  small  tracts.  The  ordinance  provided 
that  the  public  lands  should  be  surveyed  into  townships  six  miles 
square,  subdivided  into  thirty-six  sections,  each  a  square  mile. 
Every  other  township  was  to  be  sold  entire,  while  the  alternate 
townships  were  to  be  sold  by  sections.  The  most  important  pro- 
vision in  this  ordinance  was  that  which  reserved  section  number 
sixteen  in  every  township  for  the  maintenance  of  public  schools 
within  the  township. 

The  Ordinance  of  1785,  although  a  compromise,  proved  to  be  a 
triumph  for  the  New  England  policy  of  "township  planting"  as 
this  form  of  settlement  proved  more  popular  in  practice  than  the 
"indiscriminate  locations."  The  reservation  of  the  sections  six- 
teen for  education  was  also  a  New  England  idea  and  it  was  written 
into  the  ordinance  as  a  concession  to  the  New  Englanders.  At 
the  time  this  provision  was  looked  upon  as  of  minor  importance. 


1 16    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

Its  value  was  thought  to  lie  in  the  fact  that  it  would  attract  settlers 
into  the  new  country  and  promote  land  sales  rather  than  in  the  fact 
that  it  was  the  beginning  of  a  far-reaching  national  policy  for  the 
encouragement  of  public  education  by  land  grants.  Subsequent 
events  proved  that  the  true  significance  of  this  ordinance  was  in 
this  provision  that  reserved  sections  sixteen  for  education,  thereby 
establishing  a  precedent  that  became  a  fixed  policy  of  the  national 
government. 

In  Chapter  III  it  was  shown  that  the  Ohio  Company  grew  out 
of  the  Congressional  desire  to  pay  the  debt  to  the  Continental 
Army  in  western  lands.  The  "Army  Plan"  and  the  "Financiers' 
Plan"  were  both  proposals  to  make  such  a  settlement  with  the 
soldiers.  Each  of  these  plans  contained  a  provision  for  the  sup- 
port of  public  schools  by  land  grants.  They  differed  in  that  the 
"Army  Plan"  placed  the  control  of  educational  land  grants  in  the 
hands  of  the  states  that  were  to  be  formed  in  the  West  while  the 
" Financiers'  Plan"  provided  that  the  control  of  such  lands  should 
be  vested  in  the  national  government. 

Neither  of  these  plans  became  operative  so  a  group  of  New  Eng- 
land officers  of  the  Continental  Army  organized  the  Ohio  Com- 
pany of  Associates  for  the  purpose  of  buying  lands  in  Ohio  with 
continental  certificates  under  the  terms  of  the  Ordinance  of  1785 
or  others  equally  as  good.  This  company  finally  succeeded  in 
buying  1,500,000  acres  of  land  in  Ohio  on  terms  much  more  favor- 
able than  those  fixed  by  the  Ordinance  of  1785.  The  success  of 
the  Ohio  Company  in  dealing  with  Congress  was  largely  due  to  the 
fact  that  it  was  associated  with  a  large  land  speculation,  the  Scioto 
Company,  which  was  promoted  by  the  Secretary  of  the  Board  of 
Treasury  of  the  United  States  and  others  of  prominence.  Politi- 
cal deals  as  regards  the  appointment  of  the  officials  in  the  North- 
west Territory  also  contributed  to  the  success  of  the  Ohio  Com- 
pany's contract  with  the  national  government. 

In  the  discussion  of  the  Ohio  Company  it  was  also  pointed  out 
that  this  company,  through  its  very  able  representative.  Dr.  Cut- 
ler, brought  considerable  pressure  to  bear  on  Congress  in  connec- 
tion with  the  enactment  of  the  Ordinance  of  1787.  The  success  of 
the  Ohio  Company  was  conditioned,  in  part  at  least,  upon  the 
form  of  government  established  in  the  Northwest  so  it  is  not  prob- 
able that  the  company  would  have  bought  lands  in  Ohio  if  the 
terms  of  the  ordinance  for  government  of  that  territory  had  been 


Summary  and  Conclusions  117 

■unsatisfactory  to  the  members  of  the  company.  The  Ordinance 
of  1787  and  the  sale  of  lands  to  the  Ohio  Company  were  closely  as- 
sociated in  the  minds  of  Congress  and  beyond  question  the  terms 
of  the  Ordinance  were  greatly  influenced  by  the  opinions  and 
desires  of  the  members  of  the  Ohio  Company. 

In  the  fourth  chapter  was  developed  the  fact  that  while  the  Ordi- 
nance of  1787  was  not  a  land  law,  but  rather  a  governmental 
ordinance,  it  was  essentially  related  to  the  national  land  policy 
in  that  it  contained  certain  principles  of  government  the  establish- 
ment of  which  was  deemed  necessary  to  the  successful  sale  of 
public  lands.  Among  these  principles  there  were  two  of  especial 
significance,  namely:  (i)  the  formation  in  the  western  territory  of 
states  on  an  equality  with  the  original  states;  (2)  the  use  of  public 
lands  for  the  support  of  education. 

Maryland,  in  1779,  stood  for  the  establishment  of  new  states 
as  a  condition  in  the  settlement  of  the  conflicting  claims  to  the 
western  lands.  Both  the  Army  Plan  and  the  Financiers'  Plan  em- 
bodied this  principle  and  it  was  the  basic  provision  of  the  Ordi- 
nance of  1784.  The  Ordinance  of  1787  gave  better  and  final  ex- 
pression of  this  principle  and  fixed  it  definitely  as  a  part  of  the 
national  policy  of  dealing  with  the  public  domain. 

The  principle  of  land  grants  for  the  support  of  schools  was  a 
part  of  America's  heritage  from  England,  even  though  the  connec- 
tion was  somewhat  remote.  The  charity  schools  of  the  South  were 
the  most  direct  outgrowth  of  the  English  precedent.  In  New 
England  the  practice  of  granting  lands  for  the  support  of  schools 
developed  out  of  the  local  conditions  as  a  part  of  system  of  "town- 
ship planting."  The  "Army  Plan"  provided  for  land  grants  for 
schools,  although  it  made  no  such  provision  for  religion.  The 
"Financiers'  Plan"  contained  this  principle  in  the  provision  for 
land  grants  for  "seminaries  of  learning."  The  Ordinance  of  1784 
was  an  ordinance  for  government  and  was  silent  on  the  question  of 
land  grants  for  education,  it  being  understood  at  the  time  that  a 
land  ordinance  would  be  enacted  to  supplement  the  law  of  1784. 
The  support  of  schools  by  land  grants  was  a  generally  accepted 
principle  in  1784  so  the  Ordinance  of  1785,  which  was  a  land  law, 
gave  full  expression  to  this  principle.  The  contract  of  the  Ohio 
Company  with  the  national  government  secured  for  the  company 
land  grants  for  both  common  schools  and  a  university.  The 
Ordinance  of  1787,  which  was  the  organic  law  of  the  Northwest 


1 1 8    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

Territory,  expressed  this  principle  in  the  general  but  none  the  less 
comprehensive  phrase,  ''Religion,  morality  and  knowledge  being 
necessary  to  good  government  and  the  happiness  of  mankind, 
schools  and  the  means  of  education  shall  forever  be  encouraged." 
Thus,  while  the  principle  of  land  grants  for  education  did  not 
originate  in  the  Ordinance  of  1787,  such  grants  were  used  to  com- 
ply with  its  mandate  to  encourage  schools  and  the  means  of  educa- 
tion. A  precedent  was  thereby  set  which  became  a  definite  part 
of  the  national  land  policy. 

The  purpose  of  the  fifth  chapter  was  to  show  that  education  was 
a  minor  consideration  in  the  Ordinance  of  1787  and  that  no  special 
credit  is  due  those  responsible  for  the  passage  of  this  ordinance  be- 
cause its  provision  for  the  encouragement  of  schools  was  later  used 
effectively  as  an  argument  for  land  grants  for  education.  Much 
has  been  written  to  magnify  the  influence  of  the  members  of  the 
Ohio  Company  in  this  connection.  It  was  not  meant  in  the  dis-^ 
cussion  in  chapter  five  to  minimize  the  zeal  and  piety  of  Dr. 
Cutler  and  his  associates  in  their  successful  efforts  to  obtain  land 
grants  both  for  schools  and  religion,  but  rather  to  point  out  that 
there  was  no  clear  consciousness  on  their  part  as  to  the  ultimate  in- 
fluence on  education  of  the  Ordinance  of  1787.  Members  of 
Congress  generally  looked  upon  this  ordinance  as  a  means  to 
further  the  sale  of  western  lands  and  provision  concerning  educa- 
tion was  considered  a  special  inducement  to  this  end.  The  true 
significance  of  this  provision  as  the  foundation  of  a  national  policy 
was  not  perceived  by  anyone  concerned  with  its  enactment  or  by 
the  general  public.  The  importance  of  the  Ordinance  of  1787  was 
overshadowed  at  the  time  by  the  proceedings  of  the  constitutional 
convention  then  in  session. 

In  the  sixth  chapter  it  was  shown  that  while  the  ordinance  of 
July  13,  1787,  commonly  called  the  Ordinance  of  1787,  made  no 
definite  provision  for  land  grants  for  education,  the  ordinance  for 
the  sale  of  lands,  enacted  July  23,  1 787,  definitely  granted  every 
section  sixteen  for  the  support  of  public  schools  in  each  township 
and  also  reserved  two  complete  townships  for  the  support  of  a 
university  in  the  center  of  the  first  million  and  a  half  acres  pur- 
chased by  the  Ohio  Company.  The  contract  of  sale  between  the 
Board  of  Treasury  and  the  Ohio  Company,  executed  in  October, 
1787,  carried  out  these  provisions  for  land  grants  for  education, 
and  this  policy  was  continued  in  the  sale  to  Symmes.     In  this  case. 


Summary  and  Conclusions  119 

however,  only  one  township  was  granted  for  higher  education,  and 
that  was  not  given  until  Symmes  extended  his  purchase. 

These  contracts  for  the  sale  of  large  bodies  of  land,  with  reserva- 
tions for  the  support  of  schools,  made  it  possible  to  demonstrate 
the  fact  that  the  policy  of  granting  land  for  education  was  practi- 
cal. Furthermore  a  precedent  was  thus  established  that  was  the 
strongest  argument  for  further  land  grants  for  education  in  new 
states  as  this  problem  recurred  from  time  to  time.  The  large 
grants  for  universities  which  were  procured  by  these  contracts 
were  of  especial  importance  for  they  were  the  first  donations  for 
higher  education  made  by  the  national  government.  The  institu- 
tions founded  by  these  grants  were  the  beginning  of  the  American 
state  universities. 

The  seventh  chapter  described  in  brief  outline  the  educational 
work  of  the  early  settlers.  In  this  connection  were  pointed  out 
the  chief  reasons  why  schools  grew  so  slowly  in  this  early  period. 
Most  important  among  these  reasons  were  (i)  the  physical  hard- 
ships of  the  frontier  made  making  a  living  the  dominating  prob- 
lem; (2)  Indian  hostility;  (3)  general  poverty  of  the  people  with 
respect  to  everything  except  land;  (4)  scarcfty  of  money;  (5) 
scattered  population  which  made  school  attendance  small  and  ir- 
regular; (6)  the  difficulty  of  procuring  good  teachers;  and  (7)  the 
lack  of  social  unity  inherent  in  frontier  society.  All  of  these 
forces  worked  against  the  development  of  public  schools  and  a 
system  of  public  education. 

The  study  of  the  work  of  the  early  settlers  also  revealed  the  fact 
that  free  public  schools,  supported  by  taxation,  had  no  place  in  the 
educational  thought  of  that  time.  The  common  practice  was  to 
charge  tuition  in  the  public  schools  and  to  supplement  this  source 
of  revenue  with  private  donations.  The  charter  adopted  by  the 
Ohio  legislature  for  the  American  Western  University  placed  the 
board  of  trustees  of  that  institution  under  the  control  of  the  legis- 
lature. This  certainly  was  a  move  towards  a  state  university. 
From  state  controlled  schools  founded  upon  donations  of  public 
lands  the  transition  was  not  difficult  to  free  public  schools  sup- 
ported by  taxation.  Thus  while  the  early  settlers  developed  no 
new  or  distinctive  ideas  in  education,  they  aided  materially  in  the 
growth  of  the  present-day  system  of  public  education  in  the 
United  States. 

In  the  eighth  chapter  it  was  shown  that  Congress  tried  three 


120    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

plans  of  making  land  grants  for  common  schools  before  a  final 
policy  was  evolved.  The  first  plan  was  that  of  granting  every 
section  sixteen  to  the  inhabitants  of  each  township  for  the  support 
of  schools  within  the  township.  This  was  the  plan  followed  in  the 
grants  in  Ohio.  The  next  plan  was  that  used  in  Illinois  by  which 
every  section  sixteen  was  granted  to  the  state  for  the  use  of  schools 
in  each  township.  By  the  third  plan,  first  followed  in  Michigan, 
every  section  sixteen  was  granted  to  the  state  for  the  use  of  schools. 
The  state  was  thus  free  to  use  the  funds  derived  from  these  grants 
to  encourage  schools  throughout  the  state.  This  became  the 
established  policy  of  Congress  and  made  possible  the  development 
of  state  public  school  systems. 

It  was  further  shown  that  there  were  two  general  policies  fol- 
lowed in  the  Northwest  in  the  management  of  school  lands.  The 
first  policy  generally  followed  was  that  of  leasing  the  school  lands, 
but  in  each  case  it  gave  place  to  the  policy  of  selling  these  lands. 
The  transition  from  leasing  to  selling  was  made  easy  through  the 
practice  of  granting  perpetual  leases  to  school  lands,  as  in  the  Vir- 
ginia Military  Reserve  in  Ohio.  Wherever  the  policy  of  leasing 
was  tried  it  failed  to  produce  any  considerable  revenue  for  schools 
and  for  this  reason  it  was  discarded  and  the  school  lands  sold. 
However,  from  the  point  of  view  of  revenue,  the  policy  of  selling 
was  also  disappointing.  In  Ohio,  Indiana,  and  Illinois  the  selling 
plan  was  practically  a  failure,  in  Michigan  it  was  relatively  success- 
ful, while  in  Wisconsin  the  school  lands  were  sold  for  much  less 
than  their  value  in  order  to  attract  settlers  into  the  state. 

The  early  investments  of  the  funds  derived  from  the  leases  or 
sales  of  school  lands  were  generally  unfortunate.  A  great  part 
of  this  fund  was  lost  or  squandered  through  the  carelessness,  in- 
efficiency or  corruption  of  those  to  whom  the  management  of 
these  lands  was  intrusted.  Later,  when  little  remained  of  the 
school  funds,  the  investments  were  usually  safe  and  yielded  a  fair 
return  for  the  support  of  education.  On  the  whole,  the  land 
grants  for  education  in  the  old  Northwest  were  a  disappointment 
as  a  means  to  encourage  public  education. 

The  ninth  chapter  was  a  brief  history  of  the  later  applications  of 
the  principle  of  land  grants  for  education  by  the  national  govern- 
ment. It  was  shown  that  the  first  expression  of  this  principle 
after  the  adoption  of  the  federal  constitution  was  in  the  Ohio  en- 
abling act.     Next  it  was  explained  how  this  principle  was  applied, 


Summary  and  Conclusions  121 

with  increasing  liberality  in  the  grants,  to  the  other  public  land 
states.  The  main  reason  for  this  increase  in  the  land  grants  for 
education  was  the  gradual  development  of  the  practice  of  diverting 
land  grants  for  internal  improvements  and  for  other  purposes  to 
the  support  of  schools.  In  this  chapter  also  was  emphasized  the 
special  importance  of  the  grants  for  higher  education  embodied 
in  the  series  of  acts  beginning  with  the  act  of  July  2,  1862,  which 
granted  lands  for  the  support  of  agricultural  and  mechanical  col- 
leges. The  fact  that  the  schools  thus  founded  were  vocational  and 
of  especial  value  to  a  definite  and  powerful  class  of  voters  is  of 
political  rather  than  of  educational  significance.  Without  doubt 
the  motives  behind  this  legislation  grew  out  of  political  necessity 
rather  than  educational  interest,  nevertheless  it  is  important  to  note 
that  it  was  thought  that  political  necessity  could  best  be  served  by 
liberal  land  grants  for  a  form  of  higher  education.  The  last  fact 
presented  in  the  ninth  chapter  was  the  transition  from  land  grants 
for  education  to  grants  of  money  for  education  out  of  the  treasury 
of  the  United  States.  From  the  point  of  view  of  the  future  this  is 
perhaps  the  most  significant  outcome  of  national  land  grants  for 
education. 

CONCLUSIONS 

1.  In  1785  there  were  well-established  precedents  for  land  grants 
for  education,  but  the  clause  in  the  Ordinance  of  1785  which  stated 
that  "there  shall  be  reserved  the  lot  No.  16,  of  every  township,  for 
the  maintenance  of  public  schools,  within  the  said  township"  was 
the  beginning  of  the  national  land  grants  for  education.  The  res- 
ervations for  education  in  this  land  ordinance  were  not  the  ex- 
pression of  a  definite  plan  or  policy  for  the  encouragement  of 
schools,  but  were  placed  in  the  ordinance  as  a  special  inducement 
to  promote  the  sale  of  public  lands. 

2.  The  Ordinance  of  1787  was  a  governmental  ordinance  rather 
than  a  land  law  and  therefore  contained  no  land  grants  for  educa- 
tion. Nevertheless  the  article  of  this  ordinance  which  stated  that 
"religion,  morality,  and  knowledge,  being  necessary  to  good  gov- 
ernment and  the  happiness  of  mankind,  schools  and  the  means  of 
education  shall  forever  be  encouraged  "  set  forth  a  principle  and  an 
ideal  that  was  a  guiding  influence  in  the  later  development  of  a 
national  policy  of  land  grants  for  education.  The  words  of  this 
ordinance  were  quoted  time  and  again  to  urge  Congress  to  make 


122    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

further  grants  for  education.  These  words  have  been  rewritten 
again  and  again  in  the  constitutions  of  the  several  states,  and  have 
been  both  an  ideal  and  an  incentive  to  the  furtherance  of  public 
education.  The  full  influence  of  the  Ordinance  of  1787  upon 
public  education  can  never  be  exactly  measured  and  evaluated. 
The  facts  remain  that  this  ordinance  was  the  organic  law  of  the 
great  Northwest  Territory,  in  which  the  value  of  land  grants  for 
education  was  first  demonstrated;  that  its  main  provisions  were 
later  extended  to  other  territories,  and  that  the  policy  of  land 
grants  for  education,  as  well  as  other  means  for  the  encouragement 
of  education,  were  inspired  by  the  language  of  this  ordinance. 

3.  The  contracts  of  1 787-1 788  for  the  sale  of  large  bodies  of 
land  in  the  Ohio  valley  were  inseparably  associated  with  the 
enactment  of  the  Ordinance  of  1787.  The  influence  brought  to 
bear  upon  Congress,  when  this  ordinance  was  pending,  by  the 
Ohio  Company  of  Associates  was  indeed  very  strong  and,  without 
doubt,  the  mandate  for  the  encouragement  of  education,  which 
this  ordinance  contained,  was  in  complete  harmony  with  the  de- 
sires of  the  members  of  this  company.  The  land  grants  for  educa- 
tion contained  in  the  contract  of  sale  with  the  Ohio  Company  show 
clearly  that  this  was  true.  The  reservation  of  every  section  six- 
teen for  the  use  of  public  schools,  within  each  township,  was  in 
conformity  with  the  provisions  of  the  Ordinance  of  1785,  but  the 
large  land  grant  for  a  university  was  the  first  grant  of  the  kind 
made  by  the  national  government.  The  great  importance  of 
these  land  sales  of  1 787-1 788  was  in  the  fact  that  they  made  it 
possible  to  prove  in  actual  experience  that  land  grants  for  educa- 
tion were  both  practical  and  wise.  Later,  when  the  land  policy  of 
the  national  government  was  being  formed,  this  concrete  proof  and 
unanswerable  argument  aided  materially  in  perpetuating  the 
policy  of  land  grants  for  education. 

4.  One  general  conclusion  that  grows  out  of  the  study  of  the 
early  land  ordinances  is  the  fact  that  there  was  no  well-defined 
policy  or  purpose  involved  in  the  early  land  grants  for  education. 
The  political  necessity  of  binding  the  back-country  to  the  East, 
the  economic  advantages  of  such  a  union  to  the  seaboard  states, 
and  the  liquidation  of  the  national  debt  by  the  sale  of  western 
lands  were  the  prime  motives  that  led  to  the  enactment  of  these 
early  ordinances.  The  land  grants  for  education  were  incidental, 
in  so  far  as  Congress  was  concerned,  and  were  incorporated  into 


Summary  and  Conclusions  123 

these  laws  to  aid  in  the  sale  of  western  lands.  This  consideration 
was  not  so  potent  during  the  first  decade  after  the  adoption  of  the 
federal  constitution  and  it  appeared  for  a  time  as  if  land  grants  for 
schools  would  be  discontinued.  The  actual  beginning  of  a  na- 
tional policy  of  land  grants  for  education  was  in  the  act  enabling 
Ohio  to  become  a  state  in  1802,  rather  than  in  the  early  land 
ordinances. 

5.  In  so  far  as  the  use  of  land  grants  for  education  is  concerned 
two  things  are  clear.  First,  there  was  little  or  no  appreciation  of 
the  value  of  these  grants  or  interest  in  their  management  on  the 
part  of  the  public.  Secondly,  in  general  the  school  lands  and  funds 
were  poorly  managed  and  frequently  squandered  through  in- 
competence or  corruption.  School  lands  were  often  leased  on 
terms  calculated  to  serve  other  interests  rather  than  those  of 
education.  The  undue  haste  in  selling  these  lands  far  below  their 
market  value  further  attests  the  fact  that  the  general  public  was 
little  concerned  with  land  grants  for  education.  However,  it  is 
not  just  to  conclude  that  the  policy  of  selling  school  lands  was,  in 
itself,  unwise.  The  land  grants  for  education  were  made  to  assist 
the  early  settlers  in  the  new  territories  and  states.  It  was  never 
intended  that  these  lands  should  be  held  for  the  benefit  of  future 
generations  more  able  to  maintain  schools  than  were  the  pioneers. 
If  the  early  settlers  could  derive  the  greatest  aid  from  the  land 
grants  by  selling  school  lands,  such  sales  were  wise.  It  is  only 
where  the  lands  were  sold  for  considerably  less  than  their  market 
value  at  the  time  of  sale  that  adverse  criticism  is  fair. 

6.  The  form  of  land  grants  for  education  that  grew  directly  out 
of  the  provisions  of  the  early  land  ordinances  was  that  which  re- 
served every  section  sixteen  for  the  use  of  the  inhabitants  of  the 
township.  This  form  of  grant  eventually  gave  way  to  the  section 
grants  to  the  state  for  the  use  of  schools  within  each  township, 
which  in  turn  was  replaced  by  the  grants  to  the  state  for  the  use  of 
schools,  regardless  of  township  lines.  Before  these  changes  had 
taken  place  the  first  form  of  grant  had  exerted  a  very  definite  in- 
fluence on  the  public  school  system.  This  first  form  of  grant  was 
essentially  of  New  England  origin  and  was  vitally  associated  with 
the  "township  planting"  system  of  settlement  so  characteristic  of 
New  England.  Out  of  this  form  of  grant  grew  the  district  school 
system  which  flourished  wherever  this  form  of  grant  was  made. 
This  greatly  retarded  the  development  of  broad  and  sound  state 


124    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

systems  of  education ;  in  fact,  the  evils  of  the  New  England  district 
school  system  which  are  still  present  in  the  United  States  today 
were  perpetuated  by  this  early  form  of  land  grant  for  education. 
On  the  other  hand  it  is  true  that  this  form  of  grant  met  the  local 
needs  in  the  early  days  and  fostered  the  ideal  of  adapting  the 
schools  to  community  problems.  In  time  the  evils  of  the  district 
school  system  will  be  overcome,  but  this  ideal  will  remain. 

7.  One  of  the  most  important  contributions  to  the  present-day 
system  of  education  that  came  from  the  early  land  grants  is  the 
state  universities.  The  Ohio  Company  of  Associates,  who  received 
the  first  land  grant  for  higher  education  made  by  the  national  gov- 
ernment, did  not  contemplate  the  foundation  of  a  state  institution, 
but  the  state  legislature  of  Ohio  so  amended  the  charter  for  their 
university  as  to  place  its  board  of  trustees  under  direct  control  of 
the  legislature.  Thus  began  the  American  state  universities.^ 
These  institutions,  always  non-sectarian,  sometimes  non-religious, 
standing  for  academic  freedom,  a  broad  curriculum,  and  coeduca- 
tion, have  become  the  most  liberalizing  force  in  modern  education. 
In  some  respects  the  policy  of  national  land  grants  for  higher  edu- 
cation was  the  most  significant  result  of  the  early  land  ordinances. 

8.  National  land  grants  were  the  very  foundation  of  public 
education  in  the  United  States.  However,  these  grants  were 
never  adequate  for  the  support  of  schools  and  at  times  they  have 
appeared  to  retard  the  growth  of  public  education  because  they 
were  used  as  an  excuse  for  withholding  other  means  of  support. 
It  was  only  natural  that  tax- payers  would  prefer  to  depend  upon 
the  land  grants  for  the  maintenance  of  schools  rather  than  to  tax 
themselves.  The  slowness  of  the  development  of  education  by 
tcixation  was  not  due  to  the  land  grants  for  education,  but  the  in- 
adequacy of  these  grants  made  necessary  taxation  for  the  support 
of  the  schools  founded  upon  them. 

9.  The  most  interesting  educational  tendency  that  has  grown 
out  of  the  early  land  grants  for  schools  is  the  present-day  policy 
of  making  national  money  grants  out  of  the  United  States  treasury 
for  education,  as  exemplified  by  the  Smith-Hughes  act.  The 
transition  from  land  grants  for  education  to  grants  of  money  out  of 

*  Transylvania  University,  founded  in  1785  upon  land  grands  made  by  Vir- 
ginia, in  the  county  of  Kentucky,  was  first  in  point  of  time;  but  this  institution 
is  not  a  typical  state  university.  It  passed  under  the  control  of  a  religious  body 
and  is,  today,  a  denominational  school.  It  cannot  properly  be  classed  as  a 
state  university. 


Summary  and  Conclusions  125 

the  proceeds  from  the  sale  of  public  lands  was  natural  and  easy. 
The  transition  from  money  grants  out  of  public  land  funds  to 
money  grants  out  of  the  general  revenue  of  the  national  govern- 
ment is  no  more  difficult.  This  tendency  appears  to  be  leading 
towards  national  supervision  and  control  of  education.  Whatever 
the  ultimate  outcome  of  this  tendency  may  be,  or  what  may  be  the 
wisdom  of  it,  neither  of  these  questions  lies  within  the  scope  of  this 
study.  It  suffices  here  to  show  wherein  this  modern  tendency  is 
related  to  the  early  federal  land  ordinances. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 


LAWS    AND    STATUTES 


American  State  Papers.     Class  VIII  (Public  Lands).     Washington. 

Annals  of  Congress.     I789f-i823.     Washington,  1849. 

Journals  of  the  American 'Congress.     1774-88.     Washington. 

Journals  of  the  Continental  Congress.     1782-88;  1786-87.     Washington. 

U.  S.  Laws  Respecting  the  Sale  and  Disposition  of  Public  Lands.  2  vols. 
Washington,  1838. 

Land  Laws  of  the  United  States.     3  vols.     Washington,  1884. 

U.  S.  Statutes  at  Large.     36  vols.     Washington. 

Statutes  of  Ohio  and  the  Northwest  Territory.  1 788-1 833.  (S.  P.  Chase,  editor.) 
3  vols.     Cincinnati,  1835. 

Statutes  at  Large  of  Virginia.  (W.  W.  Hening,  editor.)  13  vols.  Richmond, 
1819-23. 

Ohio  Laws.    The  session  acts  of  the  state  legislature. 

Indiana  Territorial  Laws.    The  session  acts  of  the  territorial  legislature 

Laws  of  Indiana.    The  session  acts  of  the  state  legislature. 

Revised  Laws  of  Indiana.     1824. 

Indiana  Reports.    Vol.  VI. 

Laws  of  Illinois.    The  session  acts  of  the  state  legislature. 

Laws  of  Michigan.    The  session  acts  of  the  state  legislature. 

Revised  Statutes  of  Michigan.     1838. 

Statutes  of  the  Territory  of  Wisconsin.     1839. 

Laws  of  the  Territory  of  Wisconsin.  The  session  acts  of  the  territorial  legisla- 
ture. 

Laws  of  Wisconsin.    The  session  acts  of  the  state  legislature. 

Revised  Statutes  of  Wisconsin.     1849. 

BOOKS 

Adams,  H.  B.    Maryland's  Influence  upon  Lands  Cessions  to  the  United  States. 

Johns  Hopkins  University  Studies,  Vol.  Ill,  No.  i.     Baltimore,  1885. 
Atwater,  Caleb.     History  of  the  State  of  Ohio.    Cincinnati,  1838. 
Bancroft,  George.    History  of  the  Formation  of  the  Constitution  of  the  United 

States.    2  vols.     New  York,  1882. 
Barrett,  Jay  A.    Evolution  of  the  Ordinance  of  1787.    University  of  Nebraska 

Seminary  Papers,  Department  of  History  and  Economics.     New  York, 

1891. 
Black,  A.     The  Story  of  Ohio.    Boston,  1888. 

Boyd,  W.  W.    Secondary  Education  in  Ohio  Previous  to  184.0.    Ohio  Archaeo- 
logical and  Historical  Society  Publications,  Vol.  XXV.    Columbus,  1916. 
Chaddock,  R.  E.     Ohio  Before  1850.    Columbia  University  Studies  in  History, 

Economics  and  Public  Law,  Vol.  XXXI.     New  York,  1891. 

126 


Bibliography  127 

Commons,  J.  R.,  and  Knight,  G.  W.    History  of  Higher  Education  in  Ohio, 
Bureau  of  Education  Circular,  No.  5.     Washington,  1891. 

Croghan,  George.  Journal,  176$.  In  Early  Western  Travels  (R.  G.  Thwaites, 
editor).     Vol.  I.     Cleveland,  1907. 

Cuming,  Fortesque.  Tour  of  the  Western  Country,  1807-9.  In  Early  West- 
ern Travels  (R.  G.  Thwaites,  editor).     Vol.  IV.     Cleveland,  1907. 

CuTHEON,  B.  M.,  and  Utley,  Henry.  Michigan  as  a  Province,  Territory  and 
State.     New  York,  1906. 

Cutler,  M  anasseh.  A n  Explanation  of  a  Map  of  Federal  Lands,  etc.  Salem, 
1787. 

Cutler,  W.  P.,  and- J.  P.  Life,  Journals,  and  Correspondence  of  Rev.  Man- 
nasseh  Cutler.     2  vols.     Cincinnati,  1888. 

Cyclopedia  of  Education  (FdiXiX  Monroe,  editor).     5  vols.     New  York,  1911-13. 

Donaldson,  Thomas.  The  Public  Domain.  Its  History,  with  Statistics. 
Washington,  1884. 

Dunn,  J.  P.     Indiana.    Boston,  1905. 

Early  Western  Travels  (R.  G.  Thwaites,  editor).     Cleveland,  1907. 

Ford,  A.  C.  Colonial  Precedents  of  Our  National  Land  System  in  1800. 
University  of  Wisconsin  Bulletin,  No.  352.     Madison,  1910. 

•Geer,  cm.  The  Louisiana  Purchase  and  the  Westward  Movement.  Volume 
VIII  of  The  History  of  North  America  (G.  C.  Lee,  editor).  Philadelphia, 
1904. 

Hasse,  a.  R.  Index  of  Economic  Material  in  Documents  of  the  States.  Wash- 
ington, 1912. 

Hildreth,  S.  p.  Contributions  to  the  Early  History  of  the  Northwest,  etc.  Cin- 
cinnati, 1864. 

Hildreth,  S.  P.  Pioneer  History:  Being  an  Account  of  the  First  Examination 
of  the  Ohio  Valley,  and  the  Early  Settlement  of  the  Northwest  Territory, 
Cincinnati,  1848. 

Hinsdale,  B.  A.     The  Old  Northwest.     New  York,  1888. 

Howe,  Henry.    Historical  Collections  of  the  Great  West.    Vol.  I.     Cincinnati, 

1855- 
Howe,  Henry.    Historical  Collections  of  Ohio.    Columbus,  1890. 

King,  Rufus.     Ohio,  First  Fruits  of  the  Ordinance  of  1787.     Boston,  1891. 

Knight,  G.  W.  History  and  Management  of  Land  Grants  for  Education  in  the 
Northwest  Territory.  Papers  of  the  American  Historical  Association, 
Vol.  I,  No.  3.     New  York,  1885. 

Knight,  G.  W.  ,  and  Commons,  J .  R.  The  History  of  Higher  Education  in  Ohio. 
Bureau  of  Education  Circular,  No.  5.    Washington,  1891. 

Leach,  A.  F.     English  Schools  of  the  Reformation.     Westminster,  1896. 

Lewis,  A.  F.  History  of  Higher  Education  in  Kentucky.  Contributions  to 
American  Educational  History,  No.  25.     Washington,  1899. 

Marlzolff,  C.  L.  Ohio  University.  In  Ohio  Archaeological  and  Historical 
Society  Publications.     Vol.  XIX.     Columbus,  1910. 

Mathews,  A.    Ohio  and  Her  Western  Reserve.    New  York,  1902. 

JMechaux,  F.  a.  Travels  West  of  the  Allegheny  Mountains.  In  Early  West- 
ern Travels  (R.  G.  Thwaites,  editor).     Vol.  III.    Cleveland,  1907. 


128    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

Narrative  and  Critical  History  of  America  (Justin  Winsor,  editor).     8  vols, 

Boston,  1884-89. 
New  York  Daily  Advertiser,  files  of.     June,  July,  and  August,  1787. 
New  York  Packet,  files  of.     June,  July,  and  August,  1787. 
Old  South  Leaflets,  Vols.  I  and  VI.     Boston,  1888. 
Pennsylvania  Gazette,  files  of.     June,  July,  and  August,  1787. 
Peter,  Robert  and  Johanna.     Transylvania  University.    Filson  Club  Pub- 
lications, No.  II.     Louisville,  1896. 
Pickering,   Octavius.     Life   of   Timothy  Pickering.    4   vols.     Last    three 

volumes  by  C.  W.  Upham.     Boston,  1867,  1873. 
Poole,  W.  F.     Ordinance  of  1787.    Ann  Arbor,  1892. 
Randall,  H.  S.    Life  of  Thomas  Jefferson.    3  vols.     Philadelphia,  1888, 
Reports  of  the  Ohio  Archceological  and  Historical  Society.     Vols,   I-IV,  VL 

Columbus,  1895-98. 
Sato,  Shosuke.    History  of  the  Land  Question  in  the   United  States.    Johns 

Hopkins  University  Studies.     Baltimore,  1886. 
ScHAFER,  Joseph.     The  Origin  of  the  System  of  Land  Grants  for  Education. 

University  of  Wisconsin  Bulletin,  No.  63.     Madison,  1902. 
Shilling,  D.  C.    Pioneer  Schools  and  Schoolmasters.     In  Ohio  Archaeological 

and  Historical  Society  Publications,  Vol.  XXV.    Columbus,  1916. 
Summers,  T.  J.    History  of  Marietta.    Marietta,  1903. 
Sumner,  Chas.     Justice  to  the  Land  States.    Washington,  1851. 
TTte  Life  and  Public  Services  of  Arthur  St.  Clair  (W.  H.  Smith,  editor).     2  vols. 

Cincinnati,  1882. 
Thwaites,  R.  G.     On  the  Storied  Ohio.    Chicago,  1903. 
Trade  and  Industrial  Education.     Issued  by  the  Federal  Board  for  Vocational 

Education.     Bulletin  No.  17.     Trade  and  Industrial  Education,  Series 

No.   I.     Washington,   19 18. 
Treat,  P.  J.     The  National  Land  System,  1 785-1 820.    New  York,  19 10. 
Upham,  A.  H.     The  Centennial  of  Miami  University.     In  Ohio  Archaeological 

and  Historical  Society  Publications,  Vol.  XVIII.    Columbus,  1909. 
Utley,  Henry,  and  Cutheon,  B.  M.    Michigan  as  a  Province,  Territory  and 

State.    New  York,  1906. 
Venable,  W.  H.    Beginnings  of  Literary  Culture  in  the  Ohio  Valley.    Cincin- 
nati, 1 89 1. 
Walker,  C.  M.  History  of  Athens  County,  Ohio.    Ohio  Valley  Historical 

Series,  No.  2.     Cincinnati,  1869. 
Washington- Crawford  Letters  (C.  W.  Butterfield,  editor).     Cincinnati,  1877. 
Washington,  George^  Writings  of  (W.  C.  Ford,  editor).     14  vols.     New  York, 

1890. 
Washington,  George,  Writings  of  (Jared  Sparks,  editor).     12  vols.     Boston^ 

1834-37. 
Winsor,  Justin.     The  Centennial  of  Gallipolis.    In  Ohio  Archaeological  and 

Historical  Society  Publications,  Vol.  HI.     Columbus,  1895-98. 
Winsor,  Justin.     The  Westward  Movement.    Boston,  1897. 


APPENDIX  A 

THE  ORDINANCE  OF   1785 

An  Ordinance  for  Ascertaining  the  Mode  of  Disposing  of  Lands  in  the 
Western  Territory 

Passed  May  20,  1785 

Be  it  ordained  by  the  United  States  in  Congress  assembled,  that  the  territory- 
ceded  by  individual  states  to  the  United  States,  which  has  been  purchased  of 
the  Indian  inhabitants,  shall  be  disposed  of  in  the  following  manner: 

A  surveyor  from  each  state  shall  be  appointed  by  Congress  or  a  Committee  of 
the  States,  who  shall  take  an  oath  for  the  faithful  discharge  of  his  duty,  before 
the  geographer  of  the  United  States,  who  is  hereby  empowered  and  directed  to 
administer  the  same;  and  the  like  oath  shall  be  administered  to  each  chain  car- 
rier, by  the  surveyor  under  whom  he  acts. 

The  geographer,  under  whose  direction  the  surveyors  shall  act,  shall  occasion- 
ally form  such  regulations  for  their  conduct,  as  he  shall  deem  necessary;  and 
shall  have  authority  to  suspend  them  for  misconduct  in  office,  and  shall  make 
report  of  the  same  to  Congress,  or  to  the  Committee  of  the  States;  and  he  shall 
make  report  in  case  of  sickness,  death,  or  resignation  of  any  surveyor. 

The  surveyors,  as  they  are  respectively  qualified,  shall  proceed  to  divide  the 
said  territory  into  townships  of  6  miles  square,  by  lines  running  due  north  and 
south,  and  others  crossing  these  at  right  angles,  as  near  as  may  be,  unless  where 
the  boundaries  of  the  late  Indian  purchases  may  render  the  same  impracticable, 
and  then  they  shall  depart  from  this  rule  no  farther  than  such  particular  cir- 
cumstance may  require.  And  each  surveyor  shall  be  allowed  and  paid  at  the 
rate  of  two  dollars  for  every  mile,  in  length,  he  shall  run,  including  the  wages  of 
chain  carriers,  markers,  and  every  other  expense  attending  the  same. 

The  first  line,  running  due  north  and  south  as  aforesaid,  shall  begin  on  the 
river  Ohio,  at  a  point  that  shall  be  found  to  be  due  north  from  the  western 
termination  of  a  line,  which  has  been  run  as  the  southern  boundary  of  the  State 
of  Pennsylvania;  and  the  first  line,  running  east  and  west,  shall  begin  at  the 
same  point,  and  shall  extend  throughout  the  whole  territory;  provided,  that 
nothing  herein  shall  be  construed,  as  fixing  the  western  boundary  of  the  State  of 
Pennsylvania.  The  geographer  shall  designate  the  township,  or  fractional  parts 
of  townships,  by  numbers  progressively  from  south  to  north ;  always  beginning 
each  range  with  No.  i ;  and  the  ranges  shall  be  distinguished  by  their  progressive 
numbers  to  the  westward.  The  first  range,  extending  from  the  Ohio  to  the  lake 
Erie,  being  marked  No.  i .  The  geographer  shall  personally  attend  to  the  run- 
ning of  the  first  east  and  west  line;  and  shall  take  the  latitude  of  the  extremes  of 
the  first  north  and  south  line,  and  of  the  mouths  of  the  principal  rivers. 

The  lines  shall  be  measured  with  a  chain,  shall  be  plainly  marked  by  chaps 
on  the  trees,  and  exactly  described  on  a  plat,  whereon  shall  be  noted  by  the 
surveyor,  as  their  proper  distances,  all  mines,  salt-springs,  salt-licks,  and  mill- 
seats,  that  shall  come  to  his  knowledge;  and  all  water-courses,  mountains  and 

129 


1 30    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

other  remarkable  and  permanent  things,  over  and  near  which  such  lines  shall 
pass,  and  also  the  quality  of  the  lands. 

The  plats  of  the  townships  respectively,  shall  be  marked  by  sub-divisions  into 
lots  of  one  mile  square,  or  640  acres,  in  the  same  direction  as  the  external  lines, 
and  numbered  from  i  to  36;  always  beginning  the  succeeding  range  of  the  lots 
with  the  number  next  to  that  with  which  the  preceding  one  concluded.  And 
where,  from  the  causes  before-mentioned,  only  a  fractional  part  of  a  township 
shall  be  surveyed,  the  lots,  protracted  thereon,  shall  bear  the  same  numbers  as 
if  the  township  had  been  entire.  And  the  surveyors,  in  running  the  external 
lines  of  the  townships,  shall,  at  the  interval  of  every  mile,  mark  corners  for  the 
lots  which  are  adjacent,  always  designating  the  same  in  a  different  manner  from 
those  of  the  townships. 

The  geographer  and  surveyors  shall  pay  the  utmost  attention  to  the  variation 
of  the  magnetic  needle;  and  shall  run  and  note  all  lines  by  the  true  meridian, 
certifying,  with  every  plat,  what  was  the  variation  at  the  times  of  running  the 
lines  thereon  noted. 

As  soon  as  7  ranges  of  townships,  and  fractional  parts  of  townships,  in  the 
direction  from  south  to  north,  shall  have  been  surveyed,  the  geographer  shall 
transmit  plats  thereof  to  the  board  of  treasury,  who  shall  record  the  same,  with 
the  report,  in  well  bound  books  to  be  kept  for  that  purpose.  And  the  geo- 
grapher shall  make  similar  returns,  from  time  to  time,  of  every  7  ranges  as  they 
may  be  surveyed.  The  Secretary  at  war  shall  have  recourse  thereto,  and  shall 
take  by  lot  therefrom,  a  number  of  townships,  and  fractional  parts  of  town- 
ships, as  well  from  those  to  be  sold  entire,  as  from  those  to  be  sold  in  lots,  as  will 
be  equal  to  one-seventh  part  of  the  whole  of  such  7  ranges  as  nearly  as  may  be, 
for  the  use  of  the  late  continental  army;  and  he  shall  make  a  similar  draught, 
from  time  to  time,  until  a  sufficient  quantity  is  drawn  to  satisfy  the  same,  to  be 
applied  in  manner  hereinafter  directed.  The  Board  of  treasury  shall,  from  time 
to  time,  cause  the  remaining  numbers,  as  well  those  to  be  sold  entire,  as  those  to 
be  sold  in  lots,  to  be  drawn  for,  in  the  name  of  the  thirteen  states  respectively, 
according  to  the  quotas  in  the  last  preceding  requisition  on  all  the  states;  pro- 
vided, that  in  case  more  land  than  its  proportion  is  allotted  for  sale  in  any  state, 
at  any  distribution,  a  deduction  be  made  therefor  at  the  next. 

The  board  of  treasury  shall  transmit  a  copy  of  the  original  plats,  previously 
noting  thereon,  the  townships,  and  fractional  parts  of  townships,  which  shall 
have  fallen  to  the  several  States,  by  the  distribution  aforesaid,  to  the  commis- 
sioners of  the  loan  office  of  the  several  States,  who,  after  giving  notice  of  not  less 
than  two  or  more  than  six  months,  by  causing  advertisements  to  be  posted  up 
at  the  court-houses,  or  other  noted  places  in  every  county,  and  to  be  inserted  in 
one  newspaper,  published  in  the  States  of  their  residence  respectively,  shall  pro- 
ceed to  sell  the  townships,  or  fractional  parts  of  townships,  at  public  vendue,  in 
the  following  manner,  viz:  The  township,  or  fractional  part  of  a  township.  No. 
I,  in  the  first  range,  shall  be  sold  entire;  and  No.  2,  in  the  same  range,  by  lots; 
and  thus  in  alternate  order  through  the  whole  of  the  first  range.  The  town- 
ships, or  fractional  part  of  a  township.  No.  i ,  in  the  second  range,  shall  be  sold 
by  lots;  and  No.  2,  in  the  same  range,  entire;  and  so  in  alternate  order  through 
the  whole  of  the  second  range;  and  the  third  range  shall  be  sold  in  the  same  man- 
ner as  the  first,  and  the  fourth  in  the  same  manner  as  the  second,  and  thus  al- 


Appendices  131 

ternately  throughout  all  the  ranges;  provided,  that  none  of  the  lands,  within  the 
said  territory,  be  sold  under  the  price  of  one  dollar  the  acre,  to  be  paid  in  specie, 
or  loan-office  certificates,  reduced  to  specie  value,  by  the  scale  of  depreciation, 
or  certificates  of  liquidated  debts  of  the  United  States,  including  interest,  be- 
sides the  expense  of  the  survey  and  other  charges  thereon,  which  are  hereby 
rated  at  36  dollars  the  township,  in  specie,  or  certificates  as  aforesaid,  and  so  in 
the  same  proportion  for  a  fractional  part  of  a  township,  or  of  a  lot,  to  be  paid  at 
the  time  of  sales;  on  failure  of  which  payment,  the  said  lands  shall  again  be  of- 
fered for  sale. 

There  shall  be  reserved  for  the  United  States  out  of  every  township  the  four 
lots,  being  numbered  8,  11,  26,  29,  and  out  of  every  fractional  part  of  a  town- 
ship, so  many  lots  of  the  same  numbers  as  shall  be  found  thereon,  for  future  sale. 
There  shall  be  reserved  the  lot  No.  16,  of  every  township,  for  the  maintenance  of 
public  schools,  within  the  said  township;  also,  one-third  part  of  all  gold,  silver, 
lead  and  copper  mines,  to  be  sold  or  otherwise  disposed  of  as  Congress  shall 
hereafter  direct. 

When  any  township,  or  fractional  part  of  a  township,  shall  have  been  sold  as 
aforesaid,  and  the  money  or  certificates  received  therefor,  the  Loan  Officer  shall 
deliver  a  deed  in  the  following  terms: 
The  United  States  of  America,  to  all  to  whom  these  presents  shall  come,  greeting: 

Know  ye,  that  for  the  consideration  of dollars,  we  have  granted, 

and  hereby  do  grant  and  confirm,  unto ,  the  township  (or  fractional 

part  of  the  township,  as  the  case  may  be)  numbered  ,  in  the  range 

,  excepting  therefrom,  and  reserving,  one-third  part  of  all  gold,  silver, 

lead,  and  copper  mines,  within  the  same;  and  the  lots  Nos.  8,  1 1,  26,  and  29,  for 
future  sale  or  disposition;  and  the  lot  No.  16,  for  the  maintenance  of  public 

schools.     To  have  to  the  said his  heirs  and  assigns,  forever;  (or,  if 

more  than  one  purchaser,  to  the  said ,  their  heirs  and  assigns,  forever, 

as  tenants  in  common.) 

In  witness  whereof,  A  B,  commissioner  of  the  loan  office  in  the  State  of 

,  hath,  in  conformity  to  the  ordinance  passed  by  the  United  States  in 

Congress  assembled,  the  twentieth  day  of  May  in  the  year  of  our  Lord  1785, 

hereunto  set  his  hand  and  affixed  his  seal,  this day  of ,  in  the 

year  of  our  Lord ,  and  of  the  independence  of  the  United  States  of 

America  . 

And  when  any  township  or  fractional  part  of  a  township  shall  be  sold  by  lots 
as  aforesaid,  the  commissioner  of  the  loan  office  shall  deliver  a  deed  therefor  in 
the  following  form: 
The  United  States  of  America  to  all  to  whom  these  presents  shall  come,  greeting: 

Know  ye,  that  for  the  consideration  of dollars,  we  have  granted 

and  hereby  do  grant  and  confirm  unto ,  the  lot  (or  lots,  as  the  case  may 

be)  in  the  township  (or  fractional  part  of  township,  as  the  case  may  be) 
numbered  ,  in  the  range  ,  excepting  and  reserving  one- 
third  part  of  all  gold,  silver,  lead,  and  copper  mines,  within  the  same  for  future 

sale  or  disposition.     To  have  to  the  said ,  his  heirs  and  assigns  forever 

(or,  if  more  than  one  purchaser,  to  the  said their  heirs  and  assigns 

forever,  as  tenants  in  common). 

In  witness  whereof,  A  B,  Commissioner  of  the  Continental  Loan  Office,  in  the 


132    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

State  of ,  hath,  in  conformity  to  the  ordinance  passed  by  the  United 

States,  in  Congress  assembled,  the  twentieth  day  of  May,  in  the  year  of  our  Lord 
one  thousand  seven  hundred  and  eighty-five,  hereunto  set  his  hand  and  affixed 

his  seal,  this day  of ,  in  the  year  of  our  Lord ,  and  of 

the  Independence  of  the  United  States  of  America . 

Which  deeds  shall  be  recorded  in  proper  books,  by  the  Commissioner  of  the 
Loan  Office,  and  shall  be  certified  to  have  been  recorded,  previously  to  their 
being  delivered  to  the  purchaser,  and  shall  be  good  and  valid  to  convey  the  lands 
in  the  same  described. 

The  commissioners  of  the  loan  offices  respectively,  shall  transmit  to  the  board 
of  treasury  every  three  months,  an  account  of  the  townships,  fractional  parts  of 
townships,  and  lots  committed  to  their  charge;  specifying  therein  the  names  of 
the  persons  to  whom  sold,  and  the  sums  of  money  or  certificates  received  for  the 
same;  and  shall  cause  all  certificates  by  them  received,  to  be  struck  through 
with  a  circular  punch;  and  shall  be  duly  charged  in  the  books  of  the  treasury, 
with  the  amount  of  the  money  or  certificates,  distinguishing  the  same,  by  them 
received  as  aforesaid. 

If  any  township,  or  fractional  part  of  a  township  or  lot,  remains  unsold  for  18 
months  after  the  plat  shall  have  been  received,  by  the  commissioners  of  the  loan 
office,  the  same  shall  be  referred  to  the  board  of  treasury,  and  shall  be  sold  in 
such  manner  as  Congress  may  hereafter  direct. 

And  whereas  Congress,  by  their  resolutions  of  September  i6th  and  i8th,  in 
the  year  1776,  and  the  12th  of  August,  1780,  stipulated  grants  of  land  to  certain 
officers  in  the  hospital  department  of  the  late  continental  army;  for  complying 
therefore  with  such  engagements.  Be  it  ordained.  That  the  secretary  at  war, 
from  the  returns  in  his  office,  or  such  other  sufficient  evidence  as  the  nature  of 
the  case  may  admit,  determine  who  are  objects  of  the  above  resolutions  and 
engagements,  and  the  quantity  of  land  to  which  such  persons  or  their  represent- 
atives are  respectively  entitled,  and  cause  the  townships,  or  fractional  parts  of 
townships,  hereinbefore  reserved  for  the  use  of  the  late  continental  army,  to  be 
drawn  for  in  such  manner  as  he  shall  deem  expedient,  to  answer  the  purpose  of 
an  impartial  distribution.  He  shall,  from  time  to  time,  transmit  certificates  to 
the  commissioners  of  the  loan  offices  of  the  different  states,  to  the  lines  of  which 
the  military  claimants  have  respectively  belonged,  specifying  the  name  and 
rank  of  the  party,  the  terms  of  his  engagement  and  time  of  his  service,  and  the 
division,  brigade,  regiment  or  company  to  which  he  belonged,  the  quantity  of 
land  he  is  entitled  to,  and  the  township,  or  fractional  part  of  a  township,  and 
range  out  of  which  his  portion  is  to  be  taken. 

The  commissioners  of  the  loan  offices  shall  execute  deeds  for  such  undivided 
proportions  in  manner  and  form  herein  before-mentioned,  varying  only  in  such 
a  degree  as  to  make  the  same  conformable  to  the  certificate  from  the  secretary 
at  war. 

Where  any  military  claimants  of  bounty  in  lands  shall  not  have  belonged  to 
the  line  of  any  particular  state,  similar  certificates  shall  be  sent  to  the  board  of 
treasury,  who  shall  execute  deeds  to  the  parties  for  the  same. 

The  secretary  at  war,  from  the  proper  returns,  shall  transmit  to  the  board  of 
treasury,  a  certificate,  specifying  the  name  and  rank  of  the  several  claimants  of 
the  hospital  department  of  the  late  continental  army,  together  with  the  quantity 
of  land  each  claimant  is  entitled  to,  and  the  township,  or  fractional  part  of  a 


Appendices  133 

township  and  range  out  of  which  his  portion  is  to  be  taken;  and  thereupon  the 
board  of  treasury  shall  proceed  to  execute  deeds  to  such  claimants. 

The  board  of  treasury,  and  the  commissioners  of  the  loan  offices  in  the  states, 
shall,  within  18  months,  return  receipts  to  the  secretary  at  war,  for  all  deeds 
which  have  been  delivered,  as  also  all  the  original  deeds  which  remain  in  their 
hands  for  want  of  applicants,  having  been  first  recorded ;  which  deeds  so  return- 
ed, shall  be  preserved  in  the  office,  until  the  parties  or  their  representatives  re- 
quire the  same. 

And  be  it  further  ordained,  That  three  townships  adjacent  to  lake  Erie  be 
reserved,  to  be  hereafter  disposed  of  in  Congress,  for  the  use  of  the  officers, 
men,  and  others,  refugees  from  Canada,  and  the  refugees  from  Nova  Scotia, 
who  are  or  may  be  entitled  to  grants  of  land  under  resolutions  of  Congress  now 
existing  or  which  may  hereafter  be  made  respecting  them,  and  for  such  other 
purposes  as  Congress  may  hereafter  direct. 

And  be  it  further  ordained.  That  the  towns  of  Gnadenhutten,  Schoerbrun 
and  Salem,  on  the  Muskingum,  and  so  much  of  the  lands  adjoining  to  the  said 
towns,  with  the  buildings  and  improvements  thereon,  shall  be  reserved  for  the 
sole  use  of  the  Christian  Indians,  who  were  formerly  settled  there,  or  the  re- 
mains of  that  society,  as  may  in  the  judgment  of  the  geographer,  be  sufficient 
for  them  to  cultivate. 

Saving  and  reserving  always,  to  all  officers  and  soldiers  entitled  to  lands  on 
the  northwest  side  of  the  Ohio,  by  donation  or  bounty  from  the  commonwealth 
of  Virginia,  and  to  all  persons  claiming  under  them,  all  rights  to  which  they  are 
so  entitled,  under  the  deed  of  cession  executed  by  the  delegates  for  the  state  of 
Virginia  on  the  first  day  of  March,  1784,  and  the  act  of  Congress  accepting  the 
same:  and  to  the  end,  that  the  said  rights  may  be  fully  and  effectually  secured, 
according  to  the  true  intent  and  meaning  of  the  said  deed  of  cession  and  act 
aforesaid.  Be  it  ordained,  that  no  part  of  the  land  included  between  the  rivers 
called  Little  Miami  and  Scioto,  on  the  northwest  side  of  the  river  Ohio,  be  sold, 
or  in  any  manner  alienated,  until  there  shall  first  have  been  laid  off  and  appro- 
priated for  the  said  officers  and  soldiers,  and  persons  claiming  under  them,  the 
lands  they  are  entitled  to,  agreeably  to  the  said  deed  of  cession  and  act  of 
Congress  accepting  the  same. 

Done  by  the  United  States  in  Congress  assembled,  the  20th  day  of  May,  in 
the  year  of  our  Lord,  1785,  and  of  our  sovereignty  and  independence  the  ninth. 

Richard  H.  Lee,  President, 
Jour.  Am.  Cong.  v.  IV,  520-21,  or  Charles  Thompson,  Secretary. 

Land  Laws,  Part  i.  Chap.  14. 


APPENDIX  B 

POWERS  TO  THE  BOARD  OF  TREASURY  TO   CONTRACT  FOR 
THE  SALE  OF  WESTERN  TERRITORY 

The  report  of  a  committee,  consisting  of  Mr.  Carrington,  Mr.  King,  Mr. 
Dane,  Mr.  Madison,  and  Mr,  Benson,  amended  to  read  as  follows,  viz: 

That  the  Board  of  Treasury  be  authorized  and  empowered  to  contract  with 
any  person  or  persons  for  a  grant  of  a  tract  of  land  which  shall  be  bounded  by 
the  Ohio,  from  the  mouth  of  the  Scioto  to  the  intersection  of  the  western  boun- 


1 34    Educational  Significance  0}  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

dary  of  the  seventh  range  ot  townships  now  surveying;  thence,  by  the  said 
boundary  to  the  northern  boundary  of  the  tenth  township  from  the  Ohio; 
thence,  by  a  due  west  line,  to  the  Scioto;  thence,  by  the  Scioto,  to  the  beginning 
upon  the  following  terms,  viz:  The  tract  to  be  surveyed,  and  its  contents  as- 
certained, by  the  geographer  or  some  other  officer  of  the  United  States,  who 
shall  plainly  mark  the  said  east  and  west  line,  and  shall  render  one  complete 
plat  to  the  Board  of  Treasury,  and  another  to  the  purchaser  or  purchasers. 

The  purchaser  or  purchasers,  within  seven  years  from  the  completion  of  this 
work,  to  lay  off  the  whole  tract,  at  their  own  expense,  into  townships  and  frac- 
tional parts  of  townships,  and  to  divide  the  same  into  lots,  according  to  the  land 
ordinance  of  the  20th  of  May,  1785;  complete  returns  whereof  to  be  made  to  the 
Treasury  Board.  The  lot  No.  16,  in  each  township  or  fractional  part  of  a  town- 
ship, to  be  given  perpetually  for  the  purposes  contained  in  the  said  ordinance. 
The  lot  No,  29,  in  each  township  or  fractional  part  of  a  township,  to  be  given 
perpetually  for  the  purposes  of  religion.  The  lots  Nos.  8,  11,  and  26,  in  each 
township  or  fractional  part  of  a  township,  to  be  reserved  for  the  future  disposi- 
tion of  Congress.  Not  more  than  two  complete  townships  to  be  given  perpetu- 
ally for  the  purposes  of  a  University,  to  be  laid  off  by  the  purchaser  or  purchas- 
ers, as  near  the  center  as  may  be,  so  that  the  same  shall  be  of  good  land,  to  be 
applied  to  the  intended  object  by  the  legislature  of  the  State.  The  price  to  be 
not  less  than  one  dollar  per  acre  for  the  contents  of  the  said  tract,  excepting  the 
reservations  and  gifts  aforesaid,  payable  in  specie,  loan-office  certificates  re- 
duced to  specie  value,  or  certificates  of  liquidated  debts  of  the  United  States, 
liable  to  a  reduction  by  an  allowance  for  bad  land,  and  all  incidental  charges 
and  circumstances  whatever:  Provided,  That  such  allowance  shall  not  exceed, 
in  the  whole,  one-third  of  a  dollar  per  acre.  And  in  making  payment  the  princi- 
pal only  of  the  said  certificates  shall  be  admitted ;  and  the  Board  of  Treasury, 
for  such  interest  as  may  be  due  on  the  certificates  rendered  in  payment  as  afore- 
said, prior  to  January  i,  1786,  shall  issue  indents  for  interest  to  the  possessors, 
which  shall  be  receivable  in  payment  as  other  indents  for  interest  of  the  existing 
requisitions  of  Congress;  and  for  such  interest  as  may  be  due  on  the  said  certi- 
ficates between  that  period  and  the  period  of  payment,  the  said  board  shall  issue 
indents,  the  payment  of  which  to  be  provided  for  in  future  requisitions,  or  other- 
wise. Such  of  the  purchasers  as  may  possess  rights  for  bounties  of  land  to  the 
late  army,  to  be  permitted  to  render  the  same  in  discharge  of  the  contract,  acre 
for  acre:  Provided,  That  the  aggregate  of  such  rights  shall  not  exceed  one- 
seventh  part  of  the  land  to  be  paid  for:  And  provided  also.  That  there  shall 
be  no  future  claim  against  the  United  States  on  account  of  the  said  rights.  Not 
less  than  500,000  dollars  of  the  purchase-money  to  be  paid  down  upon  closing 
of  the  contract,  and  the  remainder  upon  the  completion  of  the  work  to  be  per- 
formed by  the  geographer  or  other  officer  on  the  part  of  the  United  States. 
Good  and  sufficient  security  to  be  given  by  the  purchaser  or  purchasers  for  the 
completion  of  the  contract  on  his  or  their  part.  The  grant  to  be  made  upon  the 
full  payment  of  the  consideration  money,  and  a  right  of  entr>'  and  occupancy  to 
be  acquired  immediately  for  so  much  of  the  tract  as  shall  be  agreed  upon  be- 
tween the  Board  of  Treasury  and  the  purchasers. 

Ordered,    That  the  above  be  referred  to  the  Board  of  Treasury,  to  take  order. 

July  23, 1787. 
Land  Laws,  Pt.  i.  Chap.  21. 


Appendices  135 

APPENDIX  C 

CHARTER    OF    AMERICAN    UNIVERSITY 
AS    DRAFTED    BY    DR.    M.    CUTLER 

Institutions  for  the  liberal  education  of  Youth  being  essential  to  the  progress 
of  Arts  and  Sciences,  important  to  morals  and  religion,  friendly  to  the  peace, 
order,  and  prosperity  of  Society,  and  honorable  to  the  Government  which 
patronizes  them ;  and  Congress  having  made  grants  of  lands  for  the  encourage- 
ment and  support  of  a  University,  for  schools,  and  for  the  purposes  of  Religion, 
within  the  purchase  made  by  the  Ohio  Company  of  Associates;  Therefore: 

Section  I.  Be  it  enacted  by  the  General  Assembly  (here  insert  the  style 
of  the  Assembly),  That  there  be  a  University  instituted  and  established,  and 
forever  to  remain,  within  the  limits  of  the  tract  of  land  purchased  by  the  said 
Ohio  Company  of  Associates,  by  the  name  of  the  American  University,  for  the 
instruction  of  youth  in  all  the  various  branches  of  the  liberal  Arts  and  Sciences, 
for  the  promotion  of  good  education,  piety,  religion,  and  morality,  and  for  con- 
ferring all  the  degrees  and  literary  honors  granted  in  similar  institutions. 

Sec.  II.  And  be  it  further  enacted,  That  there  shall  be  in  the  said  University, 
and  forever  to  remain,  a  body  politic  by  the  name  and  style  of  the  Board  of 
Trustees  of  the  American  University,  which  Board  of  Trustees  shall  consist  of 
the  President  and  Vice-President  of  the  University,  ex  officio,  and  of  eleven 
Trustees,  all  of  whom  shall  reside,  while  in  office,  within  the  limits  of  the 
purchase  made  by  the  said  Ohio  Company  of  Associates;  to  be  appointed  as 
hereafter  provided. 

Sec.  III.  And  be  it  further  enacted,  That  the  said  Board  of  Trustees  shall 
have  power  and  authority  to  elect  a  President,  who  shall  preside  in  the  Univer- 
sity, and  also  a  Vice-President,  who  shall  preside  in  the  absence  of  the  President; 
and  likewise  to  appoint  Professors,  Tutors,  Instructors,  and  all  such  officers  and 
servants  in  the  University  as  they  shall  deem  necessary  for  carrying  into  effect 
the  design  of  this  Institution;  and  shall  have  authority,  from  time  to  time,  to 
determine  and  establish  the  name,  number,  and  duties  of  all  the  officers  and 
servants  to  be  employed  in  the  University,  except  wherein  provision  is  other- 
wise made  by  their  act;  and  may  empower  the  President,  or  some  other  member 
of  the  Board,  to  administer  such  oaths  as  they  shall  appoint  and  determine  for 
the  well  ordering  and  good  government  of  the  University. 

Sec.  IV.  And  be  it  further  enacted.  That  the  said  Board  of  Trustees  shall 
have  power  and  authority  from  time  to  time  to  enact  statutes  and  rules  for 
the  government  of  the  said  Board,  not  incompatible  with  the  Government  of 
the  United  States,  or  the  state  in  which  the  University  is  founded;  and  shall 
have  power  and  authority  to  suspend,  dismiss,  and  disfranchise  the  President, 
Vice-President,  or  any  member  of  the  said  Board,  who  shall,  by  his  conduct, 
render  himself  unworthy  of  the  office,  station,  or  place  he  sustains;  and  said 
Board  shall  have  power  and  authority  to  suspend,  dismiss,  disfranchise,  and 
remove  from  the  University,  any  officer  or  instructor  (except  the  President 
and  Vice-President),  or  any  resident,  student,  or  servant,  whenever  the  said 
Board  shall  deem  it  expedient  for  the  interest  and  honor  of  the  University. 
And  whenever  the  President,  Vice-President,  or  any  member  of  the  Board  of 


1 36    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

Trustees,  shall  be  removed  by  death,  resignation,  or  otherwise,  or  whenever 
any  member  of  the  Board  shall  move  his  place  of  residence  without  the  limits 
of  the  purchase  of  the  Ohio  Company  of  Associates,  the  said  Board  shall  hold  a 
meeting,  and  due  notice  of  the  design  thereof  shall  be  given  to  each  member, 
for  the  purpose  of  supplying  such  vacancy;  and  there  shall  be  not  less  than 
nine  members  present  at  the  time  of  choosing  a  President,  Vice-President,  or 
member  of  the  Board,  and  the  choice  shall  be  made  by  ballot ;  and  the  President 
shall,  at  all  times,  have  the  right  of  nominating  to  the  Board,  but  not  of 
appointing,  his  successor  in  office,  except  when  he  shall  be  removed  for  mis- 
demeanor; and  the  said  Board  shall  appoint  a  certain  day  for  holding  a  public 
commencement,  and  such  commencement  shall  be  annually  holden  within  or 
near  the  University,  for  the  purpose  of  conferring  such  degrees  and  literary 
honors  as  are  usually  granted  in  similar  institutions,  at  which  time  the  Board  of 
Trustees  shall  always  be  present;  and  the  first  commencement  shall  be  holden  as 
soon  as,  in  the  opinion  of  the  Board,  there  shall  be  a  sufficient  number  of  stu- 
dents qualified  to  receive  literary  honors;  and  no  degrees,  or  literary  honors, 
shall  be  at  any  time  given  without  the  previous  approbation  of  the  Board  of 
Trustees. 

Sec.  V.  And  be  it  further  enacted.  That  the  President,  Vice-President,  and 
such  Professors,  Tutors,  or  Instructors  as  the  Board  of  Trustees  shall  appoint 
for  that  purpose,  shall  have  power  and  authority,  from  time  to  time,  to  order, 
regulate,  and  establish  the  mode  and  course  of  education  and  instruction  to  be 
pursued  in  the  University,  and  also  to  make,  publish,  and  execute  such  a  code 
of  rules,  regulations,  and  by-laws  as  they  shall  deem  necessary  for  the  well- 
ordering  and  good  government  of  the  University,  and  to  repeal  or  amend  any 
part  thereof;  provided,  nevertheless,  that  all  such  rules,  regulations,  and  by- 
laws, before  they  become  va4id,  shall  be  examined  and  approved  by  the  Board 
of  Trustees.  And  the  President,  or,  in  his  absence,  the  Vice-President  or  Sen- 
ior Instructor,  shall  direct  and  cause  to  be  holden  in  the  said  University,  quar- 
terly, in  every  year,  a  public  examination,  at  which  all  the  Professors  and 
Instructors  shall  be  present;  and  each  class  of  the  students  shall  be  examined 
relative  to  the  proficiency  they  have  made  in  their  particular  arts,  sciences,  or 
branches  of  education  in  which  they  have  been  instructed. 

Sec.  VI.  And  be  it  further  enacted.  That  the  said  Board  of  Trustees  shall 
have  one  common  seal,  which  shall  be  the  seal  of  the  University,  under  which 
shall  be  passed  every  Diploma,  or  certificate  of  Degrees,  and  the  President, 
Vice-President,  or  Board  of  Trustees  make  use  thereof  in  any  writing  or  instru- 
ment which  may  concern  the  University,  or  be  relative  to  the  end  and  design  of 
its  institution,  and  the  said  Board  shall  have  power  to  break,  change,  and  renew 
the  same  at  pleasure;  and  that  they  may  sue  and  be  sued  in  all  actions,  real, 
personal,  and  mixed,  and  prosecute  and  defend  the  same  unto  final  judgment, 
by  the  name  of  the  Board  of  Trustees  of  the  American  University. 

Sec.  VII.  And  be  it  further  enacted.  That  the  said  Board  of  Trustees  shall, 
forever  hereafter,  have  power  and  authority  to  lease,  let,  rent,  and  improve,  for 
the  use  of  the  University,  all  the  lands  contained  in  the  townships  number  eight 
and  number  nine,  in  the  fourteenth  range  of  townships,  within  the  purchase  of 
the  Ohio  Company  of  Associates,  being  the  two  townships  given  "for  the  pur- 
pose of  a  University,"  by  the  Congress  of  the  United  States  of  America,  by 


Appendices  137 

a  certain  indenture  executed  on  the  twenty-seventh  day  of  October,  in  the  year 
one  thousand  seven  hundred  and  eighty-seven,  and  confirmed  by  an  act  of  Con- 
gress, entitled  "an  act  authorizing  the  grant  and  conveyance  of  certain  lands  to 
the  Ohio  Company  of  Associates,"  passed  in  the  year  one  thousand  seven  hun- 
dred and  ninety-two,  and  also  by  Letters  Patent,  under  the  seal  of  the  United 
States,  granted  to  the  Directors  of  the  Ohio  Company  of  Associates,  dated  the 
tenth  day  of  May,  in  the  aforesaid  year;  and  the  improvements,  rent,  and  in- 
come thereof  shall  be  applied  for  carrying  into  effect  the  designs  of  the  said 
University,  in  such  way  and  manner  as  the  said  Board  of  Trustees  shall  direct. 

Sec.  VIII.  And  be  it  further  enacted.  That  the  said  Board  of  Trustees  shall, 
forever  hereafter,  be  deemed  capable,  in  law,  of  having,  holding,  and  taking  in 
fee-simple,  by  purchase,  gift,  grant,  devise,  or  otherwise,  and  of  using  and  im- 
proving any  lands,  tenements,  or  other  estate,  real  or  personal,  for  the  use  of 
the  said  University;  provided,  that  the  annual  income  of  such  real  estate  shall 
not  exceed  forty  thousand  dollars,  and  the  annual  income  or  interest  of  such 
personal  estate  shall  not  exceed  fifty  thousand  dollars,  to  be  valued  in  silver  at 
one  hundred  and  ten  cents  by  the  ounce;  and  the  annual  income  or  interest  of 
the  said  real  or  personal  estate  shall  be  applied  for  the  benefit  of  the  University 
in  such  way  and  manner  as  the  Board  of  Trustees  shall,  from  time  to  time,  de- 
termine; and  in  case  any  donation  shall  be  made  for  particular  purposes,  rela- 
tive to  the  designs  of  this  institution,  and  the  Board  of  Trustees  shall  accept  the 
same,  every  such  donation  shall  be  applied  in  conformity  to  the  will  of  the 
Donor. 

Sec.  IX.  And  be  it  further  enacted,  That  the  Board  of  Trustees,  or  such 
person  or  persons  as  they  shall  appoint,  shall  have  power  and  authority  to  let, 
lease,  or  cause  to  be  improved,  from  time  to  time,  the  lots  number  sixteen,  given 
by  Congress  for  the  use  of  schools,  and  the  lots  number  twenty-nine,  appropri- 
ated by  Congress  to  the  purposes  of  Religion,  within  the  several  townships 
granted  to  the  Directors  of  the  Ohio  Company  of  Associates  by  Letters  Patent, 
under  the  seal  of  the  United  States;  and  the  inhabitants  of  each  respective  town- 
ship shall  have  the  exclusive  right  to  the  rents,  income,  or  improvements  arising 
from  the  lot  number  sixteen  and  the  lot  number  twenty-nine,  which  are  situate 
within  their  respective  townships,  to  be  appropriated  agreeably  to  the  inten- 
tions for  which  the  said  lots  were  respectively  given;  and  the  Board  of  Trustees 
shall  pay,  or  cause  to  be  paid  without  delay,  the  amount  of  the  rents,  or  income 
of  the  lot  number  sixteen,  as  soon  as  such  rents  or  income  can  be  obtained,  or, 
otherwise,  shall  appropriate  the  improvement  thereof  solely  to  the  use  and 
benefit  of  schools;  and  in  like  manner  shall  the  profits,  in  any  way  or  manner 
arising  from  the  lot  number  twenty-nine,  be  solely  appropriated  to  the  purposes 
of  Religion,  and  under  such  rules  and  regulations  as  the  said  Board  shall 
establish  for  carrying  into  effect  the  design  of  the  respective  donations.  And 
the  said  Board  of  Trustees  shall,  as  speedily  as  may  be,  put,  or  cause  the  said 
lots  to  be  put,  into  a  state  to  be  productive,  by  causing  them  to  be  rented,  or 
otherwise  improved,  in  such  manner  as  the  said  Board  shall  judge  will  be  most 
beneficial  to  the  inhabitants  of  each  respective  township;  provided,  notwith- 
standing, that  the  rents  or  income  of  such  lots  as  may  be  situate  in  townships 
where  the  profits  arising  therefrom  can  not,  at  the  present  time,  be  applied 
agreeably  to  the  design  of  the  donation,  for  the  benefit  of  the  inhabitants  of  such 


138    Educational  Significance  of  Early  Federal  Land  Ordinances 

townships  within  the  said  townships,  the  profits  arising  from  the  improvements 
thereof  may  be  applied  for  promoting  the  instruction  of  youth  and  the  pur- 
poses of  Religion,  respectively,  where  school  instructors  and  religious  teachers 
are  actually  employed,  until  the  inhabitants  of  such  townships  can  receive  the 
benefit  thereof,  within  their  respective  townships;  and  the  said  Board  shall  ap- 
portion such  profits  in  such  way  and  manner  as,  in  their  opinion,  shall  be  most 
just  and  equitable  to  the  inhabitants,  and  most  conducive  to  promote  the  de- 
signs of  the  respective  donations. 

Sec.  X.  And  be  it  further  enacted.  That  A.  B,,  C.  D.,  E.  F.  (naming  eleven) 
shall  constitute  the  said  Board  of  Trustees,  for  the  time  being,  and  until  a 
President  and  Vice-President  of  the  University  shall  be  elected  and  enter  into 
office;  and  that  A.  B.  be,  and  he  is  hereby,  authorized  to  appoint  the  time  and 
place  of  holding  the  first  meeting,  and  that  he  notify  each  member  constituting 
the  Board  of  Trustees  to  attend  accordingly;  and  that,  as  soon  as  the  said  Board 
shall  judge  it  expedient,  a  President  and  Vice-President,  or  either  of  them,  shall 
be  chosen  in  the  manner  before  prescribed;  and  that,  at  all  times,  the  President, 
or,  in  his  absence,  the  Vice-President,  or,  in  his  absence,  such  member  as  the 
Board  shall  appoint,  shall  preside  at  the  meetings  of  said  Board  of  Trustees. 

Cutler:  Life  of  Cutler,  II:  pp.  22-27. 


VITA 

Howard  Cromwell  Taylor  was  born  November  4,  1887,  in 
Boone  County,  Missouri. 

He  attended  Stephens  College,  Primary  Department,  Co- 
lumbia, Missouri,  1 893-1 899;  Stephens  College,  Preparatory  De- 
partment, 1 899-1902;  University  Military  Academy,  Columbia, 
Missouri,  1902-1903;  University  of  Missouri,  Columbia,  Mis- 
souri, 1 903- 1 904;  Georgetown  College,  Georgetown,  Kentucky, 
1904-1907,  receiving  the  A.B.  degree  in  1906  and  the  A.M.  de- 
gree in  1907;  University  of  Missouri,  Graduate  School,  1912-1914; 
Columbia  University,  Faculty  of  Philosophy,  1914-1915,  receiving 
the  A.M.  degree  in  19 15. 

He  was  clerk  in  the  general  offices  of  the  Missouri  Pacific-Iron 
Mountain  and  Southern  Railway,  St.  Louis,  Missouri,  1907-1909; 
principal  of  the  Arcadia  Heights  School,  Arcadia,  Missouri,  1909- 
1912;  teacher  of  history  and  government,  University  of  Missouri, 
summer  of  1914;  teacher  of  history.  East  Carolina  Teacher  Train- 
ing School,  Greenville,  North  Carolina,  summer  of  191 5;  Professor 
of  Education,  Drury  College,  Springfield,  Missouri,  1915-1916; 
Instructor  in  Educational  Psychology,  University  of  Missouri, 
1916-1917;  Dean  of  the  College  of  the  City  of  El  Paso  and  As- 
sociate Professor  in  the  College  of  Mines  of  the  University  of 
Texas,  El  Paso,  Texas,  191 7 — . 


139 


^ 


^•^ 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY, 

-  BERKELEY 

THIS  BOOK  IS  DUE 

ON  THE  LAST  DATE 

STAMPED  BELOW 

Books  not. returned  on  time  are  subject  to  a  fine  of 
50c  iJer'  volume  after  the  third  day  overdue,  increasing 
to  $1.00  per  volume  after  the  sixth  day.     Books  not  in 
demand  may  be  renewed  if  application   is  made  before 
expiration  of  loan  period. 

MAY  1  \%%6 

14Apr'57TS 

'  'L   23 1^'-:? 

REC'D  LD 

Iv..-.^  3i  1951 

«0V  111989 

*'  MAB    4  ,, 

931 

*"«    30  1931 

APR   101946 

^^OecblPF 

9hr'52lU 

20m-l,'22 

U.C.  BERKELEY  LIBRARIES 


CDDb712b7b 


490304 


lA  LIBRARY 


